| Literature DB >> 24396294 |
Rita Sibele Souza Esteves1, Juliana Vaz Melo Mambrini2, Ana Cristina Borges Oliveira1, Mauro Henrique Nogueira Guimarães Abreu1.
Abstract
This study explored the association between area-level primary dental care performance and area-level demographics, dental treatment need, and health care service indicators. An ecological cross-sectional study was performed in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, in 2010. The 142 primary health care (PHC) units were grouped based on the following variables: access to individual dental treatment, frequency of dental emergencies, and frequency of individual preventive procedures. The independent variables analyzed were demographic variables, dental treatment need, and health care service indicators. The data were obtained from the information systems of the Brazilian Ministry of Health and the city of Belo Horizonte. We explored the associations between membership in a specific PHC cluster type and the independent variables using multinomial logistic regression with a significance level of 5%. Variables such as the high/very high vulnerability of population, rate of completed treatment, and rate of referrals of users to secondary care were independently associated with the clusters (P < 0.05). The performance of primary dental care services was associated with patient demographics, dental treatment need, and referrals. The results of this study have implications for the planning of public policies.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24396294 PMCID: PMC3874943 DOI: 10.1155/2013/176589
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Indicators used for cluster formation, Belo Horizonte, 2010.
| Indicators | Description |
|---|---|
| Access to individual dental care | Proportion of residents who receive a scheduled primary dental consultation with the aim of diagnosing and elaborating a preventive/therapeutic plan to address the detected needs, calculated as a percentage of the population registered by the Belo Horizonte Social Census. |
| Frequency of dental emergencies | The indicator was obtained by calculating the percentage of dental emergency consultations in primary health care (i.e., pulpal pain, acute periapical abscess, pericoronitis, periodontal abscess, dental trauma, etc.) relative to the total number of dental consultations in primary health care. |
| Proportion of individual preventive procedures | The indicator was obtained by calculating the percentage of preventive dental procedures (plaque control, fluoride treatment, sealants, dental scaling, patient counseling, and supervised individual brushing) relative to the total number of dental procedures in primary health care (preventive, restorative, and surgical procedures). |
Description of primary dental care performance in each cluster, Belo Horizonte, 2010.
| Cluster | Number of PHCs | Average access to individual dental treatment (minimum–maximum) | Average proportion of dental emergencies | Average proportion of preventive individual procedures |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (highest preventive care) | 78 | 7.1% (1.8%–24.3%) | 9.5% (1.7%–15.8%) | 66.7% (53.7%–81.6%) |
| 2 (highest emergency care) | 43 | 5.7% (1.0%–12.6%) | 24.2% (16.9%–41.4%) | 62.8% (44.9%–81.6%) |
| 3 (lowest preventive care) | 21 | 7.1% (0.7%–13.4%) | 15.8% (3.4%–37.8%) | 43.4% (28.7%–52.1%) |
Median values of demographic and dental treatment need indicators and health care services indicators in each cluster, Belo Horizonte, 2010.
| Explanatory variables (median values) | Cluster 1 | Cluster 2 | Cluster 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| High/very high vulnerability | 31.5 | 32.3 | 74.6 |
| <10 years | 9.5 | 9.0 | 10.2 |
| 10 to 19 years | 15.7 | 16.2 | 17.1 |
| 20 to 59 years | 60.5 | 60.3 | 59.9 |
| 60 years and above | 14.2 | 14.1 | 11.2 |
| No teeth with cavities | 16.8 | 12.5 | 17.4 |
| Up to 3 teeth with cavities | 43.5 | 41.9 | 46.2 |
| More than 3 teeth with cavities and/or requiring extraction | 28.6 | 33.6 | 34.5 |
| Necessity of periodontal treatment | 7.2 | 5.9 | 3.5 |
| Completed treatment | 24.1 | 21.5 | 27.3 |
| Completed treatment | 46.9 | 43.7 | 45.1 |
| Completed treatment | 18.5 | 24.4 | 27.0 |
| Completed treatment | 5.8 | 4.8 | 3.5 |
| Referral to secondary oral care | 32.5 | 33.7 | 16.0 |
| Population coverage per family health team | 2930.3 | 2936.8 | 2855.7 |
| Population coverage per oral health team | 8075.0 | 8972.5 | 6813.5 |
Multivariate multinomial logistic regression, Belo Horizonte, 2010.
| Variables | Cluster 2 × Cluster 1 | Cluster 3 × Cluster 1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| |
| Vulnerability | 1.001 (0.988–1.014) | 0.872 | 1.025 (1.008–1.041) | 0.003 |
| Referrals to secondary care | 1.008 (0.992–1.023) | 0.333 | 0.971 (0.943–0.999) | 0.045 |
| Completed treatment (more than 3 teeth with cavities and/or requiring extraction) | 1.061 (1.021–1.102) | 0.003 | 1.050 (1.003–1.100) | 0.039 |
Figure 1Probability of pertaining to each cluster according to vulnerability in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2010.
Figure 2Probability of pertaining to each cluster according to referral to secondary oral care in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2010.
Figure 3Probability of pertaining to each cluster according to completed treatment (more than 3 teeth with cavities and/or requiring extraction) in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2010.