Knowledge and Attitudes on Preventing and Treating Dentin Hypersensitivity and Its Predicting Factors: A Cross-sectional Study with Brazilian Citizens

Abstract

Objectives Most dental schools have included dentin hypersensitivity (DH) as part of their taught curriculum to educate undergraduates; however, it is possible that the public still does not recognize its symptoms and the factors that predispose to the onset of this condition. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the knowledge of a Brazilian population regarding the prevention and treatment of DH and to identify what self-reported factors can serve as predictors of the frequency of DH. Materials and Methods An online questionnaire investigated the demographic characteristics, oral health self-perception and attitudes, and DH prevention and treatment measures of 226 participants. Statistical analysis Data were analyzed descriptively and by a multiple linear regression with DH frequency score as the dependent variable (α < 0.05). Results Total 61.1% of females (n = 138) and 38.9% of males (n = 88) (mean age: 35.1 ± 12.2 years) completed the questionnaire. The sample's mean DH frequency score (minimum 0; maximum 20) was 4.2 and classified as low, with 19.1% using desensitizing products and 22.1% reporting having noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs). When experiencing DH episodes, 21.2% never and 30.1% rarely scheduled dental appointments. Regression analysis retrieved a significant final model (F [5,220] = 12.047; p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.215). Conclusion This study identified that 36.7% and 18.6% of the sample were unaware that DH can be both prevented and treated, respectively. Moreover, the presence of NCCLs, frequency of daily toothbrushing, use of desensitizing products, presence of DH modulating factors, and the presence of parafunctional habits symptoms served as predictors of DH frequency.

Сorrelation of dentin hypersensitivity (DH) with manifestations of psycho-emotional stress, its features in patients with cervical teeth pathology

“…Diagnosis of hyperesthesia was carried out by probing tooth surfaces (tactile test) and air blast and cold water tests from a triple syringe. 31 The intensity of DH was assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) being 0 "no pain" and 10 "most severe pain" and it was categorized as "mild" (1-2), "moderate" (3-7), or "severe" (8)(9)(10). The prevalence of hyperesthesia was estimated by the frequency of the individuals whose pain intensity was ≥1 on the VAS scale.…”

“…Recent studies indicate the role of daily tooth brushing, parafunctional habits, bruxism in enamel loss and dentine exposure and the subsequent DH development. 2,6,10 Horizontal occlusal forces resulting from chewing, bruxism and parafunctional activity create an area of support in the region of the tooth neck. 3 Therefore, stretching tension from chewing and questionnaire.…”

“…11 Thus, development of DH is due to many reasons, one of which is cervical lesions of teeth. 1,4,8,10,[12][13][14][15] In most clinical cases treatment of cervical pathology initially significantly reduces the symptoms of hyperesthesia, but six months later they recur in 20-30% of patients. 12 This is probably due to the multifactorial etiology of both cervical dental lesions and DH which is not effectively controlled.…”