| Literature DB >> 30355318 |
Arthur Kemoli1, Hans Gjørup2, Marie-Louise Milvang Nørregaard3, Mark Lindholm4, Tonnie Mulli5, Anders Johansson6, Dorte Haubek7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Infant Oral Mutilation (IOM) includes germectomy and early extraction of primary and permanent incisors and canines, primarily in the lower jaw. The aim of the present study was to examine the prevalence and impact of IOM, involving the removal of mandibular permanent incisors and/or canines, on dental occlusion and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) among Kenyan adolescents from Maasai Mara.Entities:
Keywords: Avulsion; Ebinyo; Germectomy; Life quality; Malocclusion; Tooth bud
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30355318 PMCID: PMC6201571 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0631-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Presence of permanent and primary mandibular teeth and occurrence of dental disruption according to tooth type (n = 284)
| DPa present | DP absent | ddb present | DP with disruption | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mandibular tooth type | bilateral | bilateral | unilateral | (n) | bilateral | unilateral |
| Second premolar | 280 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| First premolar | 282 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Canine | 267 | 5 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 6 |
| Lateral incisor | 263 | 5 | 14 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Central incisor | 108 | 164 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
aDP means permanent teeth
bdd means primary teeth
Fig. 1Kenyan teenagers without IOM (a and b) and with IOM (c, d, e and f). Examples given in c and d illustrate the traditional type of IOM (two mandibular incisors missing) among adolescents living in Maasai Mara, and the vast majority of the study population (61%) presented with this type of IOM. Space between teeth is seen between mandibular lateral incisors in case C, whereas in case D the space has been closed after removal of mandibular incisors. Cases E and F show uni- and/or bilateral missing permanent canines and/or incisors. Dental fluorosis (variation in severity) is seen on the pictures
Characteristics of dental occlusion in the infant oral mutilation (IOM) group compared to the control group
| IOM group ( | Control group ( |
| |
| Number (%) | Number (%) | ||
| Mandibular overjet (HO ≤ 0 mm) | 1 (0.6) | 0 | < 0.001 |
| Neutral overjet (0 < HO ≤ 5 mm) | 83 (49.1) | 76 (80.0) | |
| Maxillary overjet (5 < HO < 9 mm) | 52 (30.8) | 17(17.9) | |
| Extreme maxillary overjet (HO ≥ 9 mm) | 34 (20.1) | 2 (2.1) | |
| Neutral overbite (0 ≤ VO ≤ 4) | 139 (83.7) | 85 (89.5) | 0.226 |
| Deep bite (VO ≥ 5 mm) | 17 (10.2) | 4 (4.2) | |
| Frontal open bite (VO < 0) | 10 (6.0) | 6 (6.3) | |
| Molar occlusion | |||
| Mesial (one or both sides) | 19 (11.0) | 0 | < 0.001 |
| Distal (one or both sides) | 4 (2.3) | 4 (4.2) | 0.382 |
| Cross bite (one or both sides) | 14 (8.1) | 12 (12.6) | 0.230 |
| Scissor bite (one or both sides) | 5 (2.9) | 3 (3.2) | 0.902 |
| Mean (SD) [95% CI] | Mean (SD) [95% CI] |
| |
| Horizontal overjet (mm) | 5.9 (2.8) [5.5–6.4] | 4.1 (SD 1.9) [3.7–4.5] | < 0.001 |
| Vertical overbite (mm) | 2.3 (2.4) [1.1–2.6] | 2.0 (SD 1.8) [1.6–2.3] | 0.298 |
Comparison by Chi2-test (HO categories, VO categories, and molar occlusion categories) or t-test (mean HO and mean VO)
Figures in parentheses are percentages of patients with the deviation in the group
Figures in brackets [] are 95% confidence interval (CI)
aMissing data on HO of four patients and on VO of seven patients
IOM group: Teenagers missing two to four mandibular incisors and/or canines
Control group: Teenagers with all mandibular incisors and canines present
The answers on aspects related to tooth removal given by 173 adolescents with infant oral mutilation (IOM)
| Questions asked | Answers given to questions asked (number (%)) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| “Who removed teeth?” | dentist | healer | other person | do not know | not recorded |
| 4 (2.3) | 21 (12.3) | 90 (52.0) | 57 (33.0) | 1 (0.6) | |
| “Which tool was used to remove teeth?” | nail/needle | knife | other | do not know | not recorded |
| 0 (0) | 93 (53.8) | 23 (13.3) | 55 (31.8) | 2 (1.2) | |
| “Who brought you for tooth removal?” | parents | friends | other | do not know | not recorded |
| 104 (60.1) | 0 (0) | 6 (3.5) | 60 (34.7) | 3 (1.7) | |
| “How do you likea your teeth?” | happy | do not like (miss)b | do not like (other)c | do not know | not recorded |
| 139 (80.4) | 27 (15.6) | 7 (4.1) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| “Why was tooth removal carried out?” | ritual | esthetic | sick | do not know | not recorded |
| 151 (87.3) | 1 (0.6) | 1 (0.6) | 19 (11.0) | 1 (0.6) | |
| “Is pain control used during tooth removal?” | no | yes | do not know | not recorded | |
| 103 (59.5) | 5 (2.9) | 62 (35.8) | 3 (1.7) | ||
| “Is tooth removal a tribe tradition?” | no | yes | do not know | not recorded | |
| 170 (98.3) | 0 (0) | 2 (1.2) | 1 (0.6) | ||
| “Is tooth removal a family practice?” | no | yes | do not know | not recorded | |
| 146 (84.4) | 24 (14.0) | 3 (1.7) | 0 (0) | ||
| “Is tooth removal seen also in siblings?” | no | yes | do not know | not recorded | |
| 21 (12.3) | 151 (87.3) | 1 (0.6) | 0 (0) | ||
Figures given are numbers of adolescents with the specified answer, and the figures in parentheses are percentages of the total group (n = 173)
IOM: Absence of a minimum of two mandibular incisors and/or canines according to the cut-off level
aThe word “like” means “wish to have”/“to take pleasure with”
b“I do not like that I have missing teeth in the front”
c“I do not like the esthetics of my teeth for other reasons than having missing teeth”
The overall CPQ11–14 score and the four domain scores in 173 adolescents infant oral mutilation (IOM group) compared to 95 adolescents with all mandibular incisors and canines present in the oral cavity (control group)
| CPQ total | Oral symptoms | Functional limitations | Emotional well-being | Social well-being | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| na | Medianb | Meanc | Preva-lence (%)d | Extente | Medianb | Meanc | Preva-lence (%)d | Extente | Medianb | Meanc | Preva-lence (%)d | Extente | Medianb | Meanc | Preva- lence (%)d | Extente | Medianb | Meanc | Preva-lence (%)d | Extente | |
| IOM group | 173 | 4 | 6.0 | 5.5 | 0.12 | 2 | 2.4 | 3.5 | 0.04 | 1 | 2.1 | 5.4 | 0.07 | 0 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 0.02 | 0 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.01 |
| Boys | 96 | 4 | 7.0 | 7.6 | 0.18 | 2 | 2.8 | 4.3 | 0.05 | 1 | 2.3 | 6.5 | 0.09 | 0 | 1.0 | 2.1 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.01 |
| Girls | 72 | 4.5 | 7.6 | 2.9 | 0.03 | 2 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 0.03 | 1 | 2.8 | 4.3 | 0.06 | 0 | 1.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.2 | 0 | 0 |
| Control group | 95 | 4 | 5.9 | 4.4 | 0.05 | 2 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 0.04 | 0 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 0.01 | 0 | 0.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 |
| Boys | 48 | 4 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 0.02 | 2 | 2.4 | 2.1 | 0.02 | 0 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 0 |
| Girls | 44 | 2 | 4.6 | 7.1 | 0.10 | 2 | 1.9 | 4.7 | 0.07 | 0 | 1.9 | 2.3 | 0.02 | 0 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
aThe number of individuals in the respective groups. Missing data on gender of five IOM individuals and three controls
bMedian additive score, 10- and 90-percentiles in parenthesis
cMean additive score, standard deviation (SD) in parenthesis (severity of impact)
dPrevalence is the percentage of individuals with one or more items scored “often” or “every day/almost every day” in the specified domains
eExtent is the mean number of items scored “often” or “every day/almost every day” in the specified domain
IOM: Absence of a minimum of two mandibular incisors and/or canines according to the cut-off level