INTRODUCTION The study was carried out to assess and compare the oral health status and oral health-related quality of life among tobacco factory workers and cotton ginning mill workers in Guntur city, Andhra Pradesh, India. METHODS A cross-sectional study was carried among 160 tobacco factory workers and 160 cotton ginning mill workers aged 25-55 years. A simple random sampling methodology was used. The data were collected using a questionnaire and clinical examination. The questionnaire gathered information on demographic factors, factors related to the working environment, adverse habits of the study subjects and oral health-related quality of life using Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14). The subjects were clinically examined to assess their oral health status using WHO Oral Health Assessment Form (2013). RESULTS The prevalences among tobacco factory workers and among cotton ginning mill workers, respectively, were: tobacco chewing habit 38.1% and 15%; periodontal pockets 47.5% and 31.25%; loss of attachment 56.8% and 28.7%; oral mucosal lesions 13.8% and 3.8%; while the corresponding mean OHIP-14 scores were 20.81±11.59 and 16.29±9.67. All results were found to be significantly higher among tobacco factory workers compared to cotton ginning mill workers (p<0.05). All the domains of OHIP-14 were found to have a very high statistically significant positive correlation with DMFT, DMFS, periodontal pocket depth and loss of attachment in both study groups (p<0.001). The availability of tobacco in the workplace was found to be a significant barrier to quit tobacco among tobacco factory workers. CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of periodontal diseases, oral mucosal lesions, use of tobacco and the OHIP-14 scores were all found to be significantly higher among tobacco factory workers compared to cotton ginning mill workers. OHIP-14 scores correlated significantly with clinical oral health status indicators in both study groups.
Articles reporting research may be full length or brief reports. These should report original research findings within the journal's scope. Papers should generally be a maximum of 4000 words in length, excluding tables, references, abstract and key points of the article, whilst references should not exceed 36. Review PapersComprehensive, authoritative, reviews within the journal's scope. Review articles provide a review of the literature. There are two types of review papers:-systematic review papers: respond to a specific research question, accrue from criterion-based selection of sources, include a quantitative synthesis that includes a statistical method (meta-analysis) and should adhere to PRISMA guidelines. Guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity should be noted in methods section. -narrative reviews: the research question may be broad, and the scope of this review is to discuss a specific topic and keep the readers up-to-date about it. This type of review does not necessarily include a methodological approach and its synthesis is usually qualitative. Narrative reviews should include a "developments" section, with details regarding data sources used, keywords applied, time restrictions and study types selected. All review papers should be generally less than 6000 words, excluding abstract, tables, figures and references. References should not exceed 50 unless on a topic that has an extensive evidence base. The conclusion of the reviews must be specific and stem from the findings. Short ReportsBrief reports of data from original research. Short reports are shorter versions of original articles, may include one table or figure, should not exceed 1500 words and 15 references. Short reports are suitable for the presentation of research that extends previously published research, including the reporting of additional evidence and confirmatory results in other settings, as well as negative results. Authors must clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building, both published and unpublished. Study ProtocolsArticles describing a research protocol of a study. This article type can be for proposed or for ongoing research and should contain the background, research hypothesis, rationale a detailed methodology of the study. The SPIRIT 2013 Checklist guidelines ideally should be applied. Study protocols submitted for publication must have received ethics approval. Protocols of randomized trials should follow the CONSORT guidelines and must have a trial registration number, while observational studies should follow STROBE guidelines. Methodology PapersPapers that present different methodological approaches that can be used to investigate problems in a relevant scientific field and to encourage innovation. It is suggested that case studies or practical examples, which can be existing ones, are included to demonstrate the consistency and applicability of the methodology. Methodology papers should be generally less than 6000 words, excluding abstract, tables, figures and referen...
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.