Fluoridation in Newcastle and Northumberland. A clinical study of 5-year-old children

Rugg-Gunn, A. J.; Carmichael, C L; French, A D; Furness, John

doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.4803927

Cited by 23 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other reported studies, such as cross-sectional studies 6 conducted in the UK between 1980 and 1990, have shown reductions in dental caries due to fluoride of the same order of magnitude as those reported in the York Review [21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. These studies also reported additional effects, such as reductions in the prevalence of toothache and of dental treatment needing general anaesthesia.…”

Section: Dental Cariesmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fluoride in water: A UK perspective

Harrison

2005

Journal of Fluorine Chemistry

265

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Dental Cariesmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Moreover, high prevalencies of toothache, abscesses and dental extractions needing general anaesthesia are associated with the high caries experience of children in deprived social groups in the UK [21,30,31].…”

Section: Effects Of Social Classmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluoride in water: A UK perspective

Harrison

2005

Journal of Fluorine Chemistry

265

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Decidu ous (46) and permanent (5) teeth benefi t equally and the consistency of protection often overrides ethnic, cultural, and geographic differences. Ex ceptions may be due to the operation of other influencing factors.…”

Section: Specific Aspects Of Protectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluoride and Health: Dental Caries, Osteoporosis, and Cardiovascular Disease

Schamschula¹,

Barmes²

1981

Annu. Rev. Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water fluoridation is the preferred method of caries prevention. It should be promoted wherever technically feasible, whereas fluoridation of other vehicles, such as salt, milk, and sugar, should be considered (18) where no reticulated water supplies exist, as in many developing communities where caries prevalence is increasing sharply (7). Fluoride treatment of osteoporosis results in tangible improvement, but its pharmacological basis is incompletely understood and therapeutic doses are not tolerated indefinitely or by all patients. Epidemiological studies are needed to examine further the possible benefits of optimal fluoridation in relation to the prevalence off osteoporosis and heart disease.

show abstract

“…1,15,[19][20][21][22][23][24] For each time point, an approximate mid-point of the reported range of effectiveness was accepted as the base estimate in the model, with the upper and lower levels used as the bounds of the range.…”

Section: Effectiveness Of Cwfmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of changing dental needs on cost savings from fluoridation

Campain

Mariño

Wright

et al. 2010

Australian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Fluoridation in Newcastle and Northumberland. A clinical study of 5-year-old children

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

Fluoride in water: A UK perspective

Fluoride in water: A UK perspective

Fluoride and Health: Dental Caries, Osteoporosis, and Cardiovascular Disease

The impact of changing dental needs on cost savings from fluoridation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About