Dental fear is the most common self-reported indication for referral to DGA and should be taken into consideration.

Aim. Purpose of this practice and data-based study was to evaluate the outcome of dental fear treatment of patients referred to the Clinic for Fearful Dental Patients (CFDP) in the primary oral health care, City of Oulu, Finland, during period 2000–2005. Methods. A psychological approach including behavioral interventions and cognitive behavioral therapy (BT/CBT) was used for all participants combined with conscious sedation or dental general anesthesia (DGA), if needed. The outcome was considered successful if later dental visits were carried out without any notifications in the patient records of behavioral problems or sedation. Data collection was made in 2006; the average length of the observation period from the last visit in the CFPD to data collection was 2 y 3 m (SD 1 y 5 m). All information was available for 163 patients (mean age 8.9 y at referral). Study population was dominated by males (58.0%). Cause for referrals was mostly dental fear (81.0%) or lack of cooperation. Results. The success rate was 69.6% among females and 68.1% among males. Success seemed to be (p=0.053) higher for those treated in ≤12 years compared with the older ones. The participants, without need for dental general anesthesia (DGA) in the CFDP, had significantly a higher success rate (81.4%) compared with those who did (54.8%, p<0.001). Use of conscious oral sedation (p=0.300) or N2O (p=0.585) was not associated with the future success. Conclusions. A chair-side approach seems successful in a primary health care setting for treating dental fear, especially in early childhood. Use of sedation seems not to improve the success rate.

The aim of this study was to analyze the timing of first fillings posteruptively in a cohort comprising 51 asthmatic children receiving inhaled corticosteroids and living in three communities in Ostrobothnia, Finland. They had all been born in the 1980s and had had asthma check-ups in the local asthma policlinic. A group of 102 healthy age- and sex-matched children served as controls. A longitudinal survival analysis of the timing of the first filling in the primary teeth and first permanent molars was conducted retrospectively using data from the annual dental health records. The timing of the first fillings in permanent first molars showed no statistically significant differences between asthmatic and healthy children, but the filling increments in the primary molars were consistently higher in the asthmatic group; the difference for the upper first primary molars was, for instance, statistically significant (risk ratio = 2.565; 95% confidence interval = 1.333-4.935). More extractions because of caries were also performed on primary molars in the asthmatic children. The findings support the hypothesis that factors related to the asthmatic condition might increase the risk of caries. A longer surveillance time would be needed to evaluate the effect of asthma on the permanent dentition.

Objectives: Patient-centered approach can offer valuable information in improving dental care, but literature is scarce. This study aimed to evaluate self-reported factors beneficial for attendance in dental care. Material and Methods: Survey data were collected during the summer of 2020 comprising both structured questionnaires and an open question on factors considered beneficial for dental attendance. Voluntary patients over 15 years of age (n = 196, 98%) agreed to fill the questionnaires, and n = 112 of them (57%) also gave open commentary in an urgent dental care clinic, City of Oulu, Finland, comprising the study population. Dental fear was assessed by Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) sum scores (min 5, max 25). All utterances (n = 181) on an open question were evaluated by inductive content analysis to create sub-and main categories. Covid-19 pandemic case counts in Finland were low at the time of the survey, but their effect on seeking dental care was asked. The distribution of patients was evaluated by cross-tabulation, considering their age, gender, and dental fear status; the significance level was p < .05. Results: Females dominated slightly the study population (57%). The mean age of the respondents was 44 years. Half (50%) had moderate (MDAS score 10−18), and 10% had severe dental fear (≥19). The open responses could be categorized into four main categories. The largest main category by patient count concerned factors related to personnel (29%), followed by the patient (28%) and treatment (25%) related, and administrative factors (19%). Males chose factors falling into categories of administration and treatment while females chose patient and personnel-related factors (p = .048). Compared to the rest, fearful persons (MDAS > 9) reported more often factors related to personnel and treatment (p = .03). Of all participants, 17% reported seeking less dental care during the pandemic. Conclusions: Patients value dental personnel and treatment-related factors, specifically those with fear.