| Literature DB >> 36123671 |
Sara M Quritum1, Amel M Ali2, May M Raouf3, Tarek E I Omar4, Karin M L Dowidar1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with cerebral palsy (CP) are at high risk for dental caries. Alteration of some salivary properties encountered among them compared to healthy children, could play a role in this elevated risk.Entities:
Keywords: Caries experience; Cerebral palsy; MALDITOF; Salivary parameters; Salivary total antioxidant; Streptococcus mutans
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36123671 PMCID: PMC9487054 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02447-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 3.747
Fig. 1Flow chart of study participants
Fig. 2Oral health practices among cerebral palsy and healthy children
Caries experience and oral hygiene among cerebral palsy and healthy children
| SG (n = 80) | CG (n = 80) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| OHI-S§ | |||
| Mean ± SD | 2.14 ± 0.68 | 1.32 ± 0.56 | < 0.0001* |
| Median (range) | 2.0 (1.1–3.4) | 1.3 (0.3–2.5) | |
| Primary teeth | |||
| Decay (d) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 6.44 ± 6.64 | 3.79 ± 3.83 | < 0.0001* |
| Median (range) | 6 (0–11) | 2 (0–7) | |
| Missing (m) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 0.28 ± 0.67 | 0.68 ± 0.82 | 0.041* |
| Median (range) | 0 (0–2) | 0 (0–2) | |
| Filled (f) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 0.14 ± 0.47 | 0.68 ± 1.25 | 0.011* |
| Median (range) | 0 (0–2) | 0 (0–4) | |
| Caries experience (dmft) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 6.86 ± 7.11 | 5.16 ± 5.21 | 0.039* |
| Median (range) | 7 (0–12) | 4 (0–9) | |
| Permanent teeth | |||
| Decay (D) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 1.18 ± 1.56 | 0.67 ± 0.97 | 0.42 |
| Median (range) | 0 (0–4) | 0 (0–3) | |
| Missing (M) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 0.14 ± 0.47 | 0.05 ± 0.22 | 0.56 |
| Median (range) | 0 (0–2) | 0 (0–1) | |
| Filled (F) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 0 | 0.19 ± 0.51 | 0.07 |
| Median (range) | 0 | 0 (0–2) | |
| Caries experience (DMFT) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 1.32 ± 1.73 | 0.90 ± 1.26 | 0.52 |
| Median (range) | 0 (0–4) | 0 (0–4) |
SG: Study group = children with cerebral palsy
CG: control group = health children
MWU test: Mann Whitney test
*Statistically significant at P < 0.05
§Student T test used
Comparison of salivary parameters between cerebral palsy and healthy children
| Salivary parameters | SG (n = 80) | CG (n = 80) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unstimulated flow rate (ml/min)§ | |||
| Mean ± SD | 0.34 ± 0.12 | 0.54 ± 0.18 | < 0.0001* |
| Median (range) | 0.30 (0.10–0.60) | 0.50 (0.20–1.00) | |
| Initial PH§ | |||
| Mean ± SD | 7.05 ± 0.53 | 7.63 ± 0.44 | < 0.0001* |
| Median (range) | 7.31 (5.91–7.57) | 7.66 (6.70–8.32) | |
| Buffering capacity§ | |||
| Mean ± SD | 0.62 ± 0.16 | 0.75 ± 0.17 | < 0.0001* |
| Median (range) | 0.58 (0.20–0.90) | 0.80 (0.35–1.20) | |
| Salivary TAC (mmol/L)§ | |||
| Mean ± SD | 2.65 ± 1.10 | 3.29 ± 1.05 | < 0.0001* |
| Median (range) | 2.43 (0.70–4.90) | 3.36 (0.90–4.90) | |
| Mean ± SD | 6.75 ± 0.25 | 6.63 ± 0.23 | 0.002* |
| Median (range) | 6.75 (6.15–7.38) | 6.64 (6.10–7.10) | |
| Saliva consistency | |||
| Watery & clear: no (%) | 52 (65%) | 63 (78.8%) | 0.053 |
| Thick or sticky: no (%) | 28 (35%) | 17 (21.3%) | |
| Drooling† | |||
| No: no (%) | 43 (53.8%) | 80 (100%) | < 0.0001* |
| Yes: no (%) | 37 (46.3%) | 0 |
SG: Study group = children with cerebral palsy
CG: control group = health children
*Statistically significant at P < 0.05
¶Chi-squared test used
†Fisher's Exact test used
§T-test used
The association of independent variables (SES, oral health practices, and salivary parameters) and caries experience in primary teeth (dmft) in the entire sample
| Univariate regression | Multivariate regression | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted regression coefficient (95% C.I.) | Partial eta squared | Adjusted regression coefficient (95% C.I.) | Partial eta squared | |||
| CP versus normal | 0.013* | 1.35 (0.29, 2.41) | 0.08 | < 0.0001* | 5.87 (4.95, 6.78) | 0.43 |
| Age | 0.51 | 0.07 (− 0.14, 0.28) | 0.005 | |||
| Male versus female | 0.81 | 0.15 (− 1.03, 1.32) | 0.001 | |||
| Illiterate father versus university educated | 0.09 | 1.49 (− 0.21, 3.2) | 0.02 | |||
| Father occupation: Unemployed versus employed | 0.38 | 0.61 (− 0.76, 1.98) | 0.001 | |||
| Illiterate mother versus university educated | 0.37 | 0.98 (− 1.18, 3.13) | 0.005 | |||
| Mother occupation unemployed versus employed | 0.17 | 0.91 (− 0.39, 2.21) | 0.01 | |||
| Visiting dentist | < 0.0001* | 2.87 (1.7, 4.04) | 0.13 | < 0.0001* | 0.83 (0.44, 1.22) | 0.11 |
| Tooth-brushing | 0.004* | − 1.71 (− 2.87, − 0.55) | 0.05 | 0.001* | − 0.70 (− 1.10, − 0.29) | 0.07 |
| Sugary snacks twice daily | < 0.0001* | 3.22 (2.23, 4.22) | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.30 (− 0.11, 0.7) | 0.01 |
| Eating semiliquid diet versus solid | 0.053 | 1.71 (− 0.01, 2.36) | 0.02 | |||
| Eating liquid diet versus solid | < 0.0001* | 6.02 (4.39, 7.65) | 0.25 | 0.002* | 1.24 (0.47, 2.0) | 0.07 |
| Unstimulated flow rate | < 0.0001* | − 6.61 (− 9.69, − 3.53) | 0.1 | < 0.0001* | − 4.46 (− 5.55, − 3.36) | 0.31 |
| Initial pH | 0.001* | − 4.49 (− 7.22, − 1.76) | 0.06 | 0.61 | − 0.26 (− 1.28, 0.76) | 0.002 |
| Buffering capacity | < 0.0001* | − 5.0 (− 6.15, − 3.85) | 0.32 | < 0.0001* | − 3.45 (− 4.39, − 2.51) | 0.27 |
| Salivary total antioxidant capacity | < 0.0001* | 1.49 (0.98, 1.99) | 0.18 | < 0.0001* | 3.95 (3.56, 4.33) | 0.24 |
| < 0.0001* | 8.15 (6.29, 10.0) | 0.33 | < 0.0001* | 4.47 (2.66, 6.27) | 0.35 | |
| Saliva viscosity: watery versus thick | < 0.0001* | − 4.15 (− 5.2, − 3.09) | 0.28 | 0.001* | − 0.79 (− 1.23, − 0.34) | 0.08 |
F = 166.42, p < 0.0001*, adjusted R2 = 0.93, *statistically significant at P < 0.05
The association of independent variables (SES, oral health practices and salivary parameters) and caries experience in permanent teeth (DMFT) in the entire sample
| Univariate regression | Multivariate regression | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted regression coefficient (95% C.I.) | Partial eta squared | Adjusted regression coefficient (95% C.I.) | Partial eta squared | |||
| CP versus normal | 0.017* | 1.21 (0.22, 2.20) | 0.04 | < 0.0001* | 3.79 (2.66, 4.92) | 0.23 |
| Age | 0.27 | − 0.11 (− 0.31, 0.09) | 0.008 | |||
| Male versus female | 0.93 | 0.02 (− 0.51, 0.55) | 0.001 | |||
| Illiterate father versus university educated | 0.051 | 0.77 (− 0.04, 1.54) | 0.04 | |||
| Father occupation: unemployed versus employed | 0.93 | 0.03 (− 0.66, 0.73) | 0.001 | |||
| Illiterate mother versus university educated | 0.32 | 0.43 (− 0.43, 1,30) | 0.012 | |||
| Mother occupation unemployed versus employed | 0.47 | 0.21 (− 0.67, 0.79) | 0.006 | |||
| Visiting dentist | 0.08 | 0.48 (− 0.07, 1.03) | 0.13 | |||
| Tooth-brushing | 0.024* | − 0.61 (− 1.13, − 0.08) | 0.06 | 0.002* | − 1.79 (− 2.29, − 1.29) | 0.12 |
| Sugary snacks twice daily | 0.019* | 0.63 (0.11, 1.15) | 0.06 | 0.51 | 0.16 (− 0.33, 0.65) | 0.006 |
| Eating semiliquid diet versus solid | 0.52 | 0.38 (− 0.79, 1.55) | 0.005 | |||
| Eating liquid diet versus solid | 0.046* | 1.28 (0.02, 2.54) | 0.046 | < 0.0001* | 2.62 (1.29, 3.95) | 0.17 |
| Unstimulated flow rate | < 0.0001* | − 7.04 (− 9.84, − 4.24) | 0.14 | < 0.0001* | − 5.08 (− 6.43, − 3.72) | 0.27 |
| Initial pH | 0.15 | − 0.95 (− 2.26, 0.35) | 0.02 | 0.54 | − 0.33 (− 1.67, 1.00) | 0.003 |
| Buffering capacity | 0.001* | − 0.99 (− 1.59, − 0.40) | 0.11 | 0.011* | − 1.69 (− 2.98, − 0.40) | 0.08 |
| Salivary total antioxidant capacity | 0.028* | 0.28 (0.03, 0.52) | 0.06 | < 0.0001* | 0.96 (0.47, 1.44) | 0.17 |
| < 0.0001* | 2.05 (1.05, 3.05) | 0.16 | < 0.0001* | 3.16 (2.68, 3.63) | 0.20 | |
| Saliva viscosity: watery versus thick | 0.001* | − 0.92 (− 1.44, − 0.41) | 0.13 | 0.59 | − 0.16 (− 0.74, 0.42) | .004 |
F = 97.35, p < 0.0001*, Adjusted R2 = 0.86, *Statistically significant at P < 0.05
Fig. 3Correlation between salivary total antioxidant capacity and the level of S. mutans among a SG; children with cerebral palsy, b CG; healthy children