BackgroundThe presence of traumatic dental injuries and malocclusions can have a negative impact on quality of life of young children and their parents, affecting their oral health and well-being. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of traumatic dental injuries and anterior malocclusion traits on the Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) of children between 2 and 5 years-old.MethodsParents of 260 children answered the six domains of the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (ECOHIS) on their perception of the OHRQoL (outcome). Two calibrated dentists assessed the types of traumatic dental injuries (Kappa = 0.9) and the presence of anterior malocclusion traits (Kappa = 1.0). OHRQoL was measured using the ECOHIS. Poisson regression was used to associate the type of traumatic dental injury and the presence of anterior malocclusion traits to the outcome.ResultsThe presence of anterior malocclusion traits did not show a negative impact on the overall OHRQoL mean or in each domain. Only complicated traumatic dental injuries showed a negative impact on the symptoms (p = 0.005), psychological (p = 0.029), self image/social interaction (p = 0.004) and family function (p = 0.018) domains and on the overall OHRQoL mean score (p = 0.002). The presence of complicated traumatic dental injuries showed an increased negative impact on the children's quality of life (RR = 1.89; 95% CI = 1.36, 2.63; p < 0.001).ConclusionsComplicated traumatic dental injuries have a negative impact on the OHRQoL of preschool children and their parents, but anterior malocclusion traits do not.
This study evaluated the feasibility of using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS-II) in epidemiological surveys and compared ICDAS with WHO criteria. Two hundred and fifty-two children (36–59 months old) in Amparo, Brazil, were each examined by 2 examiners using ICDAS-II or WHO criteria. Dmf-t, dmf-s, caries prevalence and examination time were calculated using both systems. ICDAS-II was comparable to standard criteria when the cut-off point was score 3. Examination by ICDAS-II took twice as long as by WHO criteria. In conclusion, ICDAS-II, besides providing information on non-cavitated caries lesions, can generate data comparable to previous surveys which used WHO criteria.
This in vivo study aimed to compare the performance of different methods of approximal caries detection in primary molars. Fifty children (aged 5–12 years) were selected, and 2 examiners evaluated 621 approximal surfaces of primary molars using: (a) visual inspection, (b) the radiographic method and (c) a pen-type laser fluorescence device (LFpen). As reference standard method, the teeth were separated using orthodontic rubbers during 7 days, and the surfaces were evaluated by 2 examiners for the presence of white spots or cavitations. The area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (Az) as well as sensitivity, specificity and accuracy (percentage of correct diagnosis) were calculated and compared with the McNemar test at both thresholds. The interexaminer reproducibility was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC-absolute values) and the kappa test (dichotomizing for both thresholds). The ICC value of the reference standard procedure was 0.94. At white-spot threshold, no methods tested presented good performance (sensitivity: visual 0.20–0.21; radiographic 0.16–0.23; LFpen 0.16; specificity: visual 0.95; radiographic 0.99–1.00; LFpen 0.94–0.96). At cavitation threshold, both LFpen and radiographic methods demonstrated higher sensitivity (0.55–0.65 and 0.65–0.70, respectively) and Az (0.92 and 0.88–0.89, respectively) than visual inspection sensitivity (0.30) and Az (0.69–0.76). All methods presented high specificities (around 0.99) and similar ICCs, but the kappa value for LFpen at white-spot threshold was lower (0.44). In conclusion, both LFpen and radiographic methods present similar performance in detecting the presence of cavitations on approximal surfaces of primary molars.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.