| Literature DB >> 20623033 |
Stela M Pereira1, Gláucia M B Ambrosano, Karine L Cortellazzi, Elaine P S Tagliaferro, Carlos A Vettorazzi, Sílvio F B Ferraz, Marcelo C Meneghim, Antonio C Pereira.
Abstract
The present study investigated the distribution profile of dental caries and its association with areas of social deprivation at the individual and contextual level. The cluster sample consisted of 1,002 12-year-old schoolchildren from Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. The DMFT Index was used for dental caries and the Care Index was used to determine access to dental services. On the individual level, variables were associated with a better oral status. On the contextual level, areas were not associated with oral status. However, maps enabled determining that the central districts have better social and oral conditions than the deprived outlying districts.Entities:
Keywords: dental caries; geographic information systems; spatial analyses
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20623033 PMCID: PMC2898058 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph7052423
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Frequency of the DMFT Index and Care Index (mean, standard deviation and median) as a function of the type of school and districts.
| Private | V.Rezende | 2.15 | 2.06 | 0.12 (0.33) | 0.00 | 100.00 (0.00) | 100.00 |
| Alto | 2.95 | 1.64 | 0.48 (0.75) | 0.00 | 85.71 (37.80) | 100.00 | |
| S. Dimas | 2.77 | 2.21 | 0.94 (1.32) | 0.00 | 100.00 (0.00) | 100.00 | |
| Morato | 7.54 | 5.95 | 0.47 (1.02) | 0.00 | 100.00 (0.00) | 100.00 | |
| Centro | 3.29 | 0.75 | 0.55 (0.69) | 0.00 | 80.00 (44.72) | 100.00 | |
| Public | S.Francisco | 5.73 | 5.63 | 1.09 (1.59) | 0.00 | 67.65 (40.06) | 90.0 |
| S.Rosa | 5.81 | 7.69 | 1.67 (1.96) | 1.00 | 67.94 (38.98) | 80.0 | |
| V.Rezende | 2.15 | 2.06 | 1.17 (2.06) | 0.00 | 79.29 (35.38) | 100.0 | |
| Alto | 2.95 | 1.64 | 1.28 (1.68) | 0.00 | 75.36 (37.35) | 100.0 | |
| CECAP | 5.42 | 3.05 | 1.19 (1.62 | 1.00 | 68.94 (42.50) | 100.0 | |
| Nho Quim | 4.08 | 4.06 | 1.43 (1.60) | 1.00 | 68.44 (44.36) | 100.0 | |
| Morumbi | 4.24 | 2.92 | 1.09 (1.51) | 0.00 | 64.44 (43.01) | 75.0 | |
| S.Jorge | 7.76 | 9.66 | 1.09 (1.89) | 0.00 | 47.03 (47.31) | 45.0 | |
| S.Dimas | 2.77 | 2.21 | 0.91 (1.47) | 0.00 | 88.63 (26.53) | 100.0 | |
| B.Lenheiro | 13.55 | 7.77 | 1.00 (1.50) | 0.00 | 59.71 (46.79) | 80.0 | |
| Tanquinho | - | - | 2.33 (1.69) | 2.00 | 88.26 (29.95) | 100.0 | |
| Campestre | 8.47 | 11.62 | 1.96 (1.70) | 2.00 | 86.38 (32.26) | 100.0 | |
| S.Terezinha | 6.18 | 6.55 | 1.29 (1.53) | 1.00 | 84.14 (28.82) | 100.00 | |
| Paulista | 3.14 | 4.72 | 1.46 (1.76) | 1.00 | 82.73 (36.68) | 100.0 | |
| Pompéia | 5.72 | 4.8 | 2.78 (3.32) | 2.00 | 77.97 (37.40) | 100.0 | |
| P.Piracicaba | 6.04 | 5.42 | 1.26 (1.91) | 0.00 | 65.29 (44.15) | 100.0 | |
Bivariate association between DMFT (dichotomization by the median) and gender, socio-economic characteristics and behavioral variables related to DMFT and Care Index at the first level (subjects).
| Gender | ||||||
| Female | 289(50.09%) | 288(49.91%) | 0.0216 | 88(30.56) | 200(69.44) | 0.6427 |
| Male | 244(57.41) | 181(42.59%) | 59(32.60) | 122(67.40) | ||
| Monthly family icome up to 3 minimum wages | 463(51.16%) | 442(48.84%) | 0.0002 | 144(32.58) | 298(67.42) | 0.0495 |
| > 3 minimum wages | 60(72.29%) | 23(27.71%) | 3 (13.04) | 20(86.96) | ||
| People living in the household | ||||||
| ≤4 people | 291(55.85%) | 230(44.15%) | 0.0700 | 61(26.52) | 169(73.48) | 0.0195 |
| >4 people | 236(50.11%) | 235(49.89%) | 86(36.60) | 149(63.40) | ||
| Father’s education | ||||||
| Complete middle-school | 200(45.05%) | 244 (54.95%) | <0.0001 | 84(34.43) | 160(65.57) | 0.0503 |
| Complete high school | 143(59.58%) | 97(40.42%) | 23(23.71) | 74(76.29) | ||
| Complete undergraduate | 89(68.99%) | 40(31.01%) | 8(20.00) | 32(80.00) | ||
| Mother’s education | ||||||
| Complete middle-school | 283(47.56%) | 312(52.44%) | <0.0001 | 108 (34.62) | 204(65.38) | 0.0172 |
| Complete high school | 175(61.40%) | 110 (38.60%) | 31 (28.18) | 79(71.82) | ||
| Complete undergraduate | 69(61.61%) | 43(38.39%) | 6(4.14) | 37(86.08) | ||
| Visits to the dentist | ||||||
| Never/Irregularly | 246(57.75%) | 180 (42.25%) | 0.0060 | 91(50.56) | 89(49.44) | <0.0001 |
| Regularly | 274(48.93%) | 286 (51.07%) | 55(19.23) | 231(80.77) | ||
| Home ownership | ||||||
| Yes | 345(54.59%) | 287(45.41%) | 0.2341 | 83(28.92) | 204(71.08) | 0.1329 |
| No | 185(50.68%) | 180(49.32%) | 64(35.56) | 116(64.44) | ||
| Car ownership | ||||||
| No car | 202(47.64%) | 222(52.36%) | 0.0034 | 81(36.49) | 141(63.51) | 0.0214 |
| ≥1 | 320(57.04%) | 241(42.96%) | 64(26.56) | 177(73.44) | ||
| Toothbrushing frequency | ||||||
| ≤ once/day | 65(51.59%) | 61(48.41%) | 0.7136 | 26(42.62) | 355(57.38) | 0.0401 |
| > twice/day | 464(53.33%) | 406(46.67%) | 120(29.56) | 286(70.44) | ||
| Onset of toothbrushing | ||||||
| ≤1 year old | 432(53.93%) | 369(46.07%) | 0.2966 | 107(29.00) | 262(71.00) | 0.0174 |
| >1 year old | 95(49.74%) | 96(50.26%) | 40(27.21) | 56(58.33) | ||
Minimum wage at the time of the data collection, approximately US$163.55
Care Index.
Multilevel logistic regression model with DMFT as dependent variable.
| Monthly family icome: | |||||
| up to 3 minimum wages | 0.3229 | 0.1602 | 1.8 | 1.0−3.6 | 0.0313 |
| > 3 minimum wages | Reference | ||||
| People living in the household: | |||||
| > 4 people | 0.1547 | 0.0756 | 1.4 | 1.0−1.8 | 0.0344 |
| ≤ 4 people | Reference | ||||
| Father’s education : | |||||
| Complete middle-school | −0.3410 | 0.1924 | 0.7 | 0.5−1.05 | 0.0763 |
| Complete high school | −0.5466 | 0.2824 | 0.6 | 0.3−1.0 | 0.0532 |
| Complete undergraduate | Reference | ||||
| Mother’s education: | |||||
| Complete middle-school | −0.4706 | 0.1947 | 0.6 | 0.4−0.9 | 0.0157 |
| Complete high school | −0.1688 | 0.2899 | 0.8 | 0.5−1.4 | 0.5604 |
| Complete undergraduate | Reference | ||||
| Visits to the dentist: | |||||
| Never/Irregularly | 0.2860 | 0.0792 | 1.8 | 1.3−2.4 | 0.0003 |
| Regularly | Reference | ||||
| -2 loglikelihood (first level) | 1015.528 | ||||
| Estimate | SE | β | p | ||
| % No income/cluster | 0.00876 | 0.0516 | −0.0580 | 0.8651 | |
| % Illiterate/cluster | −0.0445 | 0.0504 | 0.1259 | 0.2027 | |
| -2 loglikelihood (full model) | 1044.459 |
Multilevel logistic regression model with Care Index as dependent variable.
| Estimate | SE | Adjusted OR (IC > 75%) | 95%CI | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly family icome up to 3 minimum wages | Reference | ||||
| >3 minimum wages | 0.6799 | 0.3902 | 3.9 | 0.84−17.9 | 0.0601 |
| Visits to dentist: | |||||
| Never/Irregularly | Reference | ||||
| Regularly | 0.7794 | 0.1229 | 4.7 | 2.9−7.7 | <0.0001 |
| −2 loglikelihood (first level) | 577.178 | ||||
| Estimate | SE | β | p | ||
| % No income/cluster | −0.3049 | 0.1705 | −2.0138 | 0.0960 | |
| % Illiterate/cluster | 0.1606 | 0.1705 | −0.2533 | 0.3492 | |
| −2 loglikelihood (full model) | 554.191 |
Figure 1.Distribution of the DMFT Index in the sampled districts.
Figure 2.Smaller map containing the demographic data of percentage of heads of families receiving no income in the districts (IPPLAP—Research and Planning Institute of Piracicaba).
Figure 3.Smaller map containing percentage of heads of families that was illiterate in the districts (IPPLAP – Research and Planning Institute of Piracicaba).
Figure 4.Distribution of the Care Index in the sampled districts.