| Literature DB >> 29327216 |
M Skalsky Jarkander1, M Grindefjord2,3,4, K Carlstedt5.
Abstract
AIMS: To investigate the prevalence and risk factors of dental erosion (DE) among a group of adolescents in Stockholm County.Entities:
Keywords: Adolescents; Dental erosion; Prevalence; Risk factors
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29327216 PMCID: PMC5807473 DOI: 10.1007/s40368-017-0317-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Arch Paediatr Dent ISSN: 1818-6300
Fig. 1Study population and number of subjects in each phase of the study
Questionnaire comprising 19 questions
| 1. Hypersensitivity of teeth | Yes or no |
| 2. If symptoms, when occurring | When brushing teeth or when consuming food and/or drink |
| 3. Consumption of Coca-Cola or other soft-drinks | Several times a day, several times a week, more seldom |
| 4. Consumption of juice or sport drinks | Several times a day, several times a week, more seldom |
| 5. Consumption of juice at breakfast | Yes or no |
| 6. Juice or sport drink as thirst quencher after exercise | Yes or no |
| 7. Consumption of fruit | More than three times a day, more seldom |
| 8. Consumption of apples | More than three times a day, more seldom |
| 9. Consumption of citrus fruits | More than three times a day, more seldom |
| 10. Computing | More than 3 h a day, less than 3 h a day, not every day |
| 11. Exercise frequency | Every day, several times a week, more seldom |
| 12. Self-assessed gastric reflux | Yes or no |
| 13. If yes, how often | Daily, several times a week |
| 14. Intake of fluoride tablets | Yes or no |
| 15. Tooth brushing frequency | More than two times a day, two times a day, more seldom |
| 16. Tooth brushing before and/or after breakfast | Before breakfast, after breakfast, before and after breakfast |
| 17. Use of chewing gum | Daily, once a week, more seldom |
| 18. Use of mouthwash | Yes or no |
| 19. If yes, what kind of mouthwash | With fluoride, without fluoride |
Ordinal scale used for grading severity of dental erosion on lingual surfaces of maxillary incisors (Johansson et al. 1996)
| Grade | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 0 | No visible changes, developmental structures remain, macro-morphology intact |
| 1 | Smoothened enamel, developmental structures have totally or partially vanished. Enamel surface is shiny, matt, irregular, ‘melted’, rounded or flat, macro-morphology generally intact |
| 2 | Enamel surface as described in grade 1. Macro-morphology clearly changed, faceting or concavity formation within the enamel, no dentinal exposure |
| 3 | Enamel surface as described in grades 1 and 2. Macro-morphology greatly changed (close to dentinal exposure of large surfaces) or dentin surface exposed by ≤ 1/3 |
| 4 | Enamel surface as described in grades 1, 2 and 3. Dentin surface exposed by > 1/3 or pulp visible through the dentin |
This scale was used for grading severity of dental erosion via intra-oral photographs
Ordinal scale used for grading cuppings on occlusal surfaces of mandibular first permanent molars (Hasselkvist et al. 2010)
| Grade | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 0 | No cupping/intact cusp tip |
| 1 | Rounded cusp tipa |
| 2 | Cupping ≤ 1 mm |
| 3 | Cupping > 1 mm |
| 4 | Fused cuppings: at least two cuppings are fused together on the same tooth |
aChanged morphology compared to the assumed original anatomy at the time of eruption. This scale was used for grading cuppings via intra-oral photographs
Bivariate logistic regression predicting dental erosion
| Factor | Beta | SE | p | OR (CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (15 vs 17 years) | 0.281 | 0.132 | 0.034 | 1.32 (1.30, 1.35) |
| Male gender | 0.285 | 0.132 | 0.031 | 1.33 (1.31, 1.35) |
| Tooth hypersensitivity | 0.376 | 0.150 | 0.012 | 1.46 (1.42, 1.49) |
| Frequency of soft drinks (3 categoriesa) | < 0.001 | |||
| Frequency of juice (3 categoriesa) | NS | |||
| Juice at breakfast | 0.183 | 0.132 | NS | 1.20 (1.18, 1.22) |
| Drinking after exercise | 0.553 | 0.170 | 0.006 | 1.74 (1.69, 1.79) |
| Frequency of fruits > 3 times/day | 0.347 | 0.156 | 0.027 | 1.41 (1.38, 1.45) |
| Frequency of apples > 3 times/day | 0.561 | 0.243 | 0.021 | 1.75 (1.65, 1.86) |
| Frequency of citrus > 3 times/day | 0.091 | 0.251 | NS | 1.10 (1.08, 1.17) |
| Time at computer (3 categoriesa) | NS | |||
| Reflux | 1.04 | 0.264 | < 0.001 | 2.84 (2.64, 3.03) |
| Natrium Fluoride rinse | 0.518 | 0.319 | NS | 1.68 (1.52, 1.86) |
| Frequency of tooth brushing (3 categoriesa) | NS | |||
| Tooth brushing adjacent to breakfast - | ||||
| (3 categoriesa) | NS | |||
| Frequency of chewing gum (3 categoriesa) | NS | |||
| Mouthwash | − 0.085 | 0.164 | NS | 0.98 (0.89, 0.94) |
| Mouthwash type (2 categoriesa) | NS |
Beta regression coefficient, SE standard error, P probability value, CI confidence interval (95%)
aQuestionnaire, Table 1
Multiple logistic regressions predicting dental erosion. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI)
| Factor | Beta | SE | p | OR | CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age 17 vs. 15 years | 0.273 | 0.136 | 0.045 | 1.31 | 1.01–1.71 |
| Freq.soft drinks not often vs. several times a week | 0.487 | 0.136 | < 0.001 | 1.63 | 1.25–2.13 |
| Drinking after exercise | 0.479 | 0.175 | 0.006 | 1.61 | 1.15–2.28 |
| Reflux | 1.009 | 0.268 | < 0.001 | 2.74 | 1.62–4.64 |
| Constant | − 1.296 | 0.122 |
Beta regression coefficient, SE standard error, P probability value, CI confidence interval (95%)
Fig. 2Cumulative percentage probability of dental erosion. 1. None of the predictors, identified in this study present; 2. age (17 years); 3. age + soft drinks several times a week; 4. age + soft drinks several times a week + juice or sport drink after exercise; 5. age + soft drinks several times a week + juice or sport drink after exercise + reflux