The process of not attending the dentist is a vicious cycle in which anxiety plays a crucial role. A research project concerning the disease and non-disease reasons for full mouth extraction provided an opportunity to describe the dental histories in terms of dental attendance pattern and related factors which resulted in full dentures. Three profiles of dental histories could be outlined: 1) The regular attenders (19%). Because of their age (means = 47 yr), their positive attitude towards dentistry together with their positive attitude towards full dentures, it is suggested that the possibilities of keeping the natural dentition were exhausted so that full mouth extraction was an acceptable solution. 2) The symptomatic attenders (38%). Because anxiety, which was widespread in this group, was not based on negative experiences, it is suggested that anxiety is caused by social learning. Together with their positive attitude towards full dentures, the high prevalence of full dentures in their social environment and their low socioeconomic status, the conclusion is drawn that these patients lived in a culture which supports behavior that leads to total tooth loss. 3) Once regular attenders (43%). In this group anxiety leads to a negative perception of dental visits and to a negative attitude towards dentists. As a consequence dental visits are deferred, which results in deterioration of the dentition. Experiences with dentists are distorted in a negative way, which increases dental anxiety. Facilitated by a positive attitude towards full dentures, their bad dental condition finally urges them to take full dentures at early age.
A postal questionnaire was sent to a 10% (n = 444) national random sample of Dutch dental practitioners. The response was 77% (n = 344). The practitioners prescribed bitewings on average for 57% of "new" 25-yr-old patients. Five significant (P less than 0.05) variables explained 24% of the variation in bitewing prescribing for these "new" patients. These were, in declining level of importance: the initial dental condition of the patient, the proportion of restorative treatment decisions based solely on radiographs, the level of urbanization of the practice location, the technical level of the practice equipment and the importance attached by dentists to the diagnostic use of dental floss for interproximal caries diagnosis. The low power of the regression model in explaining variation in the decision to take bitewings indicates an idiosyncratic use of bitewing radiographs for caries diagnosis. A weak tendency to adopt different diagnostic sets of procedures was demonstrated.
Differences in total tooth loss between an urban and a rural area (dentist-patient ratio 1:2500 and 1:5700 respectively) have been studied. Patients who participated in this study were those who received total tooth extraction during the calendar yr 1982 (urban area) and 1983 (rural area). The overall dentist response was 90%, the combined patient response was 75%. During the year, in the urban area 137 cases of total tooth extraction were recorded; in the rural area this was 237. This frequency is equivalent to 109 and 226 total tooth extractions per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively. The age and sex distribution of the urban and rural population could not account for this difference. The rural population had a lower educational level and more people insured in a State Health Scheme, which is related to income. The frequency of symptomatic attenders was highest in the rural area among those who were insured in a State Health Scheme. It is concluded that differences in numbers of total extractions between the rural and urban areas cannot be explained entirely by differences in population characteristics.
Edentulousness varies with the availability and accessibility of dental care. Comparing the dental status of groups of patients getting full dentures might give insight into the effect of different levels of supply of dental care on the dental condition. Therefore a research project has been started in the Netherlands in an urban and a rural area, having dentist-patient ratios of 1:2,500 and 1:5,700 respectively. In the urban and rural area an equal proportion had partial dentures prior to losing the last of their teeth. However, in the urban area 33% of the patients wearing partial dentures had full maxillary or mandibular dentures; in the rural area this figure was 73%. In the rural area a larger proportion had lost 21 or more teeth at the moment of total extraction. Therefore, it was concluded that in the urban area more effort was spent in maintaining the natural dentition. Looking at DMF-T figures and separate components of DMF-T, no differences could be established between people living in areas with a high and a low dentist-patient ratio.
Reasons for full mouth extraction in an urban and a rural area in The Netherlands (dentist-patient ratio 1:2500 and 1:5700 respectively) have been studied. Patients who participated in this combined sociodental research project were those who received full mouth extractions over a period of 1 yr. The combined patient response was 75% and the overall dentist response 90%. In the urban and the rural areas respectively 137 and 237 cases of full mouth extraction were recorded. When comparing the dentists' diagnoses with the conditions of the dentitions there appeared to be a fair degree of agreement in most of the cases, although some striking deviations were also found. In the relationship between the patient's opinion and the condition of the dentition some unexplained discrepancies were found: 37% of the dentitions in which the teeth and attachment were in a healthy condition were perceived as bad by the patients. Dentists and patients agreed in their perceptions of the dental conditions in 60% of the cases. In 27% there was a strong disagreement. In most of the discrepancies found plausible explanations could be given. In some cases this was not possible. As this involves a substantial minority of cases, dentists should be aware of reasons other than the clinical condition in the disabling treatment of full clearance.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
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.