2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01339.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Oral health messages for the Australian public. Findings of a national consensus workshop#

Abstract: The Australian National Oral Health Plan 2004-2013 noted the importance of oral health promotion in improving oral health and stated that broad agreement was required on a consistent suite of evidence-based oral health promotion messages. Consistent messages are needed to avoid confusion among the public and to assist the advocacy for oral health being integrated into general health promotion. A workshop was held to examine the scientific evidence and develop consensus oral health messages for the Australian p… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this regard, recent studies have analyzed the effectiveness of different approaches to patients depending on the degree of dependence on tobacco and the aggressiveness of these techniques, with studies such as the one carried out by Houstonn et al ( 12 ), which shows that an approach via email for smoking patients, including a variety of preventive content and oral health promotion as well as guidelines on preventing oral cancer, achieved encouraging results in the U.S. Similarly, the National Oral Health Promotion Clearing House in Australia ( 13 ) sent messages highlighting the link between smoking and various diseases, recommending giving up smoking, and encouraging patients to visit their dentist to receive further advice. Nohlert et al ( 14 ) compared high-intensity interventions with low-intensity interventions in a group of patients in Sweden, regardless of their degree of addiction, in combination with other techniques.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…In this regard, recent studies have analyzed the effectiveness of different approaches to patients depending on the degree of dependence on tobacco and the aggressiveness of these techniques, with studies such as the one carried out by Houstonn et al ( 12 ), which shows that an approach via email for smoking patients, including a variety of preventive content and oral health promotion as well as guidelines on preventing oral cancer, achieved encouraging results in the U.S. Similarly, the National Oral Health Promotion Clearing House in Australia ( 13 ) sent messages highlighting the link between smoking and various diseases, recommending giving up smoking, and encouraging patients to visit their dentist to receive further advice. Nohlert et al ( 14 ) compared high-intensity interventions with low-intensity interventions in a group of patients in Sweden, regardless of their degree of addiction, in combination with other techniques.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Langevin et al [7] claimed that regular dental visits increase the probability of diagnosing and managing oral diseases in their early stages, thereby limiting any significant or irreversible damage to teeth and gums. Given the scarcity of robust scientific evidence on the appropriate frequency of dental visits, the Australian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH) [8, 9] recommends that frequency must be based on different oral health needs and individual risk levels. The AIHW [10] reports that 69.4% of Australian children and teenagers visited the dentist within the past year whereas a significant proportion of 16.9% failed to visit in the last 5 years.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, plaque in children has lower irritation potential; oral hygiene can be withheld in preschool children for 27 days with no consequences unlike in adults where inflammatory changes become obvious by the 3 rd day [52]. For children in whom the risk for periodontal diseases is low, conducting a major public health campaign to promote twice daily tooth brushing in a bid to reduce periodontal disease in children would be considered inefficient use of resources [53]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%