The aim of this 2-year prospective cohort study was to determine whether food-level sugar-starch combinations are predictors of dental caries in a low-risk adolescent population. A total of 645 subjects, aged 12-13 yr at baseline, were recruited from 25 secondary colleges in the north-west region of metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Examinations to record dental caries status were conducted annually. Dental caries was diagnosed according to the criteria of the World Health Organization. Dietary information was collected by four, continuous 4-d records. Demographic data was collected by parental self-administered questionnaire. A total of 504 subjects provided complete information for analysis. Approximately 37% of subjects experienced an increment in caries. In the multivariate model, only the low sugar-high starch food group was a significant predictor of caries increment on all surfaces and pit and fissure surfaces. For both these surfaces, significant interactions with starch at low sugar and across those clusters with a maximum proportion of sugar and/or starch (that is, high sugar-low starch, medium sugar-medium starch and high sugar-low starch) were found. Sugar-starch interactions may be predictive of caries risk in a low-risk adolescent population. Changing patterns of food consumption and the widespread exposure to various fluoride vehicles are possibly altering the diet-dental caries dynamic that once existed.
Background: Although community water fluoridation has been one of the cornerstone strategies for the prevention and control of dental caries, questions are still raised regarding its cost-effectiveness. This study assessed the impact of changing dental needs on the cost savings from community water fluoridation in Australia. Methods: Net costs were estimated as Costs (programme) minus Costs (averted caries). Averted costs were estimated as the product of caries increment in non-fluoridated community, effectiveness of fluoridation and the cost of a carious surface. Modelling considered four age-cohorts: 6-20, 21-45, 46-65 and 66+ years and three time points 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. Cost of a carious surface was estimated by conventional and complex methods. Real discount rates (4, 7 (base) and 10%) were utilized. Results: With base-case assumptions, the average annual cost savings ⁄ person, using Australian dollars at the 2005 level, ranged from $56.41 (1970s) to $17.75 (1990s) (conventional method) and from $249.45 (1970s) to $69.86 (1990s) (complex method). Under worst-case assumptions fluoridation remained cost-effective with cost savings ranging from $24. 15 (1970s) to $3.87 (1990s) (conventional method) and $107.85 (1970s) and $24.53 (1990s) (complex method). For 66+ years cohort (1990s) fluoridation did not show a cost saving, but costs ⁄ person were marginal. Conclusions: Community water fluoridation remains a cost-effective preventive measure in Australia.
Public dental clinics play an important role in delivering dental services to Australian adults on low incomes. Our objective was to compare the accessibility of and client satisfaction with the two main types of public dental senice providers in Victoria and with private practice services. Clients attending the Royal Dental Hospital of Melbourne, Northcote Conimunity Health Centre and private practices in Melbourne were surveyed. The hospital's clients faced the greatest ecological and organisational obstacles, while private clients faced the greatest financial and desirability obstacles. Community centre clients faced fewer ecological and organisational obstacles than hospital clients, with the exception of long waiting times. Private practice clients were more satisfied overall, and had better continuity of care. Private practice clients were more satisfied with access, availability and convenience than community centre clients, who in turn were more satisfied than hospital clients. There was no distinction between private practice and hospital clients on satisfaction lvith 'pain and treatment', but community centre clients were less satisfied. There n.as no significant difference between client group evaluations of interaction with the dentist. Regardless of the effects of the Commonwealth Dental Health Program, distinctions between various senice types and public clinic types are likely to remain, because of their different settings. The contrast between a central hospital and a community health centre, in terms of the ecological and organisational obstacles to care, points to the advantages of putting dental services close to the communities they serve.
Public dental clinics play an important role in delivering dental services to Australian adults on low incomes. Our objective was to compare the accessibility of and client satisfaction with the two main types of public dental senice providers in Victoria and with private practice services. Clients attending the Royal Dental Hospital of Melbourne, Northcote Conimunity Health Centre and private practices in Melbourne were surveyed. The hospital's clients faced the greatest ecological and organisational obstacles, while private clients faced the greatest financial and desirability obstacles. Community centre clients faced fewer ecological and organisational obstacles than hospital clients, with the exception of long waiting times. Private practice clients were more satisfied overall, and had better continuity of care. Private practice clients were more satisfied with access, availability and convenience than community centre clients, who in turn were more satisfied than hospital clients. There was no distinction between private practice and hospital clients on satisfaction lvith 'pain and treatment', but community centre clients were less satisfied. There n.as no significant difference between client group evaluations of interaction with the dentist. Regardless of the effects of the Commonwealth Dental Health Program, distinctions between various senice types and public clinic types are likely to remain, because of their different settings. The contrast between a central hospital and a community health centre, in terms of the ecological and organisational obstacles to care, points to the advantages of putting dental services close to the communities they serve.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.