BACKGROUND: The effect of Early Head Start (EHS) on receipt of preventive oral health services (POHS) from both oral and medical health care providers is not known. METHODS: The authors compared children enrolled in North Carolina EHS programs with similar children enrolled in Medicaid but not EHS on the use of POHS. They analyzed 4 dependent variables (oral assessment by medical health care provider, oral assessment by oral health care provider, fluoride application by medical health care provider, fluoride application by oral health care provider) by using multivariate logistic regression that controlled for covariates. RESULTS: Primary caregivers of children enrolled in EHS (n = 479) and Medicaid (n = 699) were interviewed when children were approximately 10 and 36 months of age. An average of 81% of EHS and non-EHS children received POHS from an oral or medical health care provider at follow-up. EHS children had greater odds of receiving an oral health assessment (odds ratio [OR], 2.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.74 to 3.13) and fluoride (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16 to 2.03) from an oral health care provider than children not enrolled. EHS children had decreased odds (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.99) of receiving fluoride from a medical health care provider. CONCLUSIONS: Both children enrolled in EHS and community control participants had high rates of POHS, but the source of services differed. EHS children had greater odds of receiving POHS from oral health care providers than non-EHS children. EHS and non-EHS children had equal rates for fluoride overall because of the greater percentage of non-EHS children with medical fluoride visits. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The integration of POHS in early education and Medicaid medical benefits combined with existing dental resources in the community greatly improves access to POHS.
BACKGROUND: The effect of Early Head Start (EHS) on receipt of preventive oral health services (POHS) from both oral and medical health care providers is not known. METHODS: The authors compared children enrolled in North Carolina EHS programs with similar children enrolled in Medicaid but not EHS on the use of POHS. They analyzed 4 dependent variables (oral assessment by medical health care provider, oral assessment by oral health care provider, fluoride application by medical health care provider, fluoride application by oral health care provider) by using multivariate logistic regression that controlled for covariates. RESULTS: Primary caregivers of children enrolled in EHS (n = 479) and Medicaid (n = 699) were interviewed when children were approximately 10 and 36 months of age. An average of 81% of EHS and non-EHSchildren received POHS from an oral or medical health care provider at follow-up. EHSchildren had greater odds of receiving an oral health assessment (odds ratio [OR], 2.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.74 to 3.13) and fluoride (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16 to 2.03) from an oral health care provider than children not enrolled. EHSchildren had decreased odds (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.99) of receiving fluoride from a medical health care provider. CONCLUSIONS: Both children enrolled in EHS and community control participants had high rates of POHS, but the source of services differed. EHSchildren had greater odds of receiving POHS from oral health care providers than non-EHSchildren. EHS and non-EHSchildren had equal rates for fluoride overall because of the greater percentage of non-EHSchildren with medical fluoride visits. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The integration of POHS in early education and Medicaid medical benefits combined with existing dental resources in the community greatly improves access to POHS.
Keywords:
Early intervention (education); health care disparities; health services research; integration; oral health care for children; preventive dentistry; preventive health services
Authors: R Gary Rozier; Sally C Stearns; Bhavna T Pahel; Rocio B Quinonez; Jeongyoung Park Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Jacqueline M Burgette; John S Preisser; Morris Weinberger; Rebecca S King; Jessica Y Lee; R Gary Rozier Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2017-02-16 Impact factor: 9.308