Y Kolisa1, O A Ayo-Yusuf, D C Makobe. 1. Dept. of Community Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria. yolanda.kolisa@up.ac.za
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to describe the demographic profile of children receiving dental general anaesthesia (DGA) at the Pretoria Oral-and-Dental Hospital, South Africa, the type of treatment received and the level of compliance with the six-month preventive follow-up visit. METHODS: Retrospective review of records of children treated under DGA between January 2009 and December 2010. RESULTS: The study group contained 78-children. Of these, 79.5% were between one and four years of age (mean 3.7-years; SD: 2.01), and 54% were female. The parents of more than half the sample (56.4%) were unemployed. The majority (55.2%) recorded no medical condition prior to undergoing DGA. Of the treatments performed, 63% were extractions (mean = 4.7 teeth/child), 51% involved placement of composite restorations (mean = 3.4 teeth) and 18% were fitting of stainless steel crowns (mean = 2.1 teeth). No preventive treatment was performed under DGA. Only 14 children (18%) returned within 15-months for follow-ups. Seven returnees were re-booked for a second DGA appointment for severely carious teeth; the rest received preventive treatment. Female children (Odds Ratio (OR): 0.28; p = 0.04) and children with no medical-condition (OR: 0.20; p = 0.03) were less likely to return for a follow-up visit. Children with employed parents were more likely (OR: 3.50; p = 0.09) to return for follow-ups. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of preventive treatment prior to and during DGA, especially in a setting where the caries disease burden and unemployment are high.
OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to describe the demographic profile of children receiving dental general anaesthesia (DGA) at the Pretoria Oral-and-Dental Hospital, South Africa, the type of treatment received and the level of compliance with the six-month preventive follow-up visit. METHODS: Retrospective review of records of children treated under DGA between January 2009 and December 2010. RESULTS: The study group contained 78-children. Of these, 79.5% were between one and four years of age (mean 3.7-years; SD: 2.01), and 54% were female. The parents of more than half the sample (56.4%) were unemployed. The majority (55.2%) recorded no medical condition prior to undergoing DGA. Of the treatments performed, 63% were extractions (mean = 4.7 teeth/child), 51% involved placement of composite restorations (mean = 3.4 teeth) and 18% were fitting of stainless steel crowns (mean = 2.1 teeth). No preventive treatment was performed under DGA. Only 14 children (18%) returned within 15-months for follow-ups. Seven returnees were re-booked for a second DGA appointment for severely carious teeth; the rest received preventive treatment. Female children (Odds Ratio (OR): 0.28; p = 0.04) and children with no medical-condition (OR: 0.20; p = 0.03) were less likely to return for a follow-up visit. Children with employed parents were more likely (OR: 3.50; p = 0.09) to return for follow-ups. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of preventive treatment prior to and during DGA, especially in a setting where the caries disease burden and unemployment are high.