Tooth sensitivity experience among residential university students

Bamise, Cornelius Tokunbo; Kolawole, KA; Oloyede, E. O.; Esan, TA

doi:10.1111/j.1601-5037.2009.00385.x

Cited by 29 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, the prevalence of dentinal sensitivity was 52.8%. This was comparable to 52.0%6 and 57.2%9 dentinal sensitivity reported in general dental practice population but lower than 68.4% obtained in previous survey among similar population in another geographic location in Nigeria 13. 67.7% reported in a Periodontology clinic population in Hong Kong14 and 62.0% obtained in a telephone community survey conducted in Hong Kong 15.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Dentinal sensitivity among a selected group of young adults in Nigeria

Azodo

Amayo

2011

Niger Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:There is paucity of data on the prevalence of dentinal sensitivity outside the hospital setting and impact of dentinal sensitivity among young adults in Africa. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and impact of dentinal sensitivity among young adults in Nigeria.Materials and Methods:A cross-sectional survey was conducted among the undergraduates of University of Benin in August, 2010. Self-administered questionnaire elicited information on demography, self-reported dentinal sensitivity, the trigger factor, action taken, functional, and psychological impact.Results:The prevalence of dentinal sensitivity was 211 (52.8%) among the participants and it was significantly higher in females than males (P=0.027). Participants experienced shocking sensation more on the left-side of the mouth. The most common trigger factor for the dentinal sensitivity was due to cold drink [169 (80.1%)]. Among the participants with dentinal sensitivity, majority [139 (65.9%)] have not taken any action and only 24 (11.4%) have visited the dentist because of the problem. Dentinal sensitivity exhibited psychological impact among the participants as 64 (30.3) reported unhappiness due to the shocking sensation. Eating and talking were disturbed, respectively, in 59 (28.0%) and 12 (5.7%) of the participants.Conclusion:The prevalence of dentinal sensitivity was high which was significantly higher in females than males. Despite the negative functional and psychological impact among the participants, only a few sought dental professional care. Screening for dentinal sensitivity at community level is required to proffer early treatment and ameliorate its impact on the populace.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Dentinal sensitivity among a selected group of young adults in Nigeria

Azodo

Amayo

2011

Niger Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unlike investigators in previous studies suggested, 12,19,20,29–32 the participants in our study did not tend to have aggressive toothbrushing habits, have noncarious cervical lesions, have associated obvious occlusal trauma (in the judgment of the clinician), have undergone scaling and root planing or have undergone in-office whitening. Although the prevalences of dentin hypersensitivity for at-home and for in-office tooth whitening were similar, the number of participants who had undergone in-office tooth whitening treatment was small in this study, and the association of it with dentin hypersensitivity did not reach statistical significance.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 72%

The prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity in general dental practices in the northwest United States

Cunha‐Cruz¹,

Wataha²,

Heaton³

et al. 2013

The Journal of the American Dental Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity is uncertain, yet appropriate diagnosis and treatment of dentin hypersensitivity require accurate knowledge regarding its prevalence. The authors conducted a study to estimate the prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity in general dental practices and to investigate associated risk factors. Methods The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of 787 adult patients from 37 general dental practices within Northwest Practice-based Research Collaborative in Evidence-based DENTistry (PRECEDENT). Dentin hypersensitivity was diagnosed by means of participants’ responses to a question regarding pain in their teeth and gingivae, and practitioner-investigators conducted a clinical examination to rule out alternative causes of pain. Participants recorded their pain level on a visual analog scale and the Seattle Scales in response to a one-second air blast. The authors used generalized estimating equation log-linear models to estimate the prevalence and the prevalence ratios. Results The prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity was 12.3 percent; patients with hypersensitivity had, on average, 3.5 hypersensitive teeth. The prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity was higher among 18- to 44-year olds than among participants 65 years or older; it also was higher in women than in men, in participants with gingival recession than in those without gingival recession and in participants who underwent at-home tooth whitening than in those who did not. Hypersensitivity was not associated with obvious occlusal trauma, noncarious cervical lesions or aggressive toothbrushing habits. Conclusions One in eight participants from general practices had dentin hypersensitivity, which was a chronic condition causing intermittent, low-level pain. Patients with hypersensitivity were more likely to be younger, to be female and to have a high prevalence of gingival recession and at-home tooth whitening. Practical Implications Given dentin hypersensitivity’s prevalence, clinicians should diagnose it only after investigating all other possible sources of pain.

show abstract

“…The very detailed recording in a recent Australian study reveals that the first and second premolars, the first molars, and canines are all affected at very similar rates ranging from 8 to 11 % in the maxilla and 4 to 9 % in the mandible [18]. This is also plausible, when erosion, abfractions, and/or vigorous tooth brushing are considered as etiological factors [27, 28]. As a direct result, these teeth are all in line and exposed to similar conditions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology of dentin hypersensitivity

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveIn contrast to the well-established caries epidemiology, data on dentin hypersensitivity seem to be scarce and contradictory. This review evaluates the available literature on dentin hypersensitivity and assesses its prevalence, distribution, and potential changes.Materials and methodsThe systematic search was performed to identify and select relevant publications with several key words in electronic databases. In addition, the articles’ bibliographies were consulted.ResultsPrevalence rates range from 3 to 98 %. This vast range can be explained partly by the differences in the selection criteria for the study sample and also the variety in diagnostic approaches or time frames. Women are slightly more affected than men and an age peak of 30–40 years has been reported. Still, the prevalence of erosions with dentin exposure seems to increase in younger adults, often resulting in hypersensitivity. In older patients, root surfaces are frequently exposed due to periodontal disease which is associated with a high rate of dentin hypersensitivity, especially after periodontal treatment and intensified brushing activity. On the other hand, the number of affected seniors with tooth loss or even edentulism is reduced. About 25–30 % of the adult population report dentin hypersensitivity. Most dentists also consider it to be a relevant problem in their practice, but they request more information on this topic. Maxillary teeth are affected to a higher extent, but the different teeth show very similar rates. Buccal surfaces clearly show the highest prevalence rates.ConclusionIn spite of the advances regarding management of dentin hypersensitivity, it still remains an epidemiologically understudied field.Clinical relevanceAlthough great variations have been observed in the prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity, this issue is often observed by dentists and related by patients. However, further studies are necessary to find the cause of this condition and refine its management.

show abstract

Tooth sensitivity experience among residential university students

Cited by 29 publications

References 34 publications

Dentinal sensitivity among a selected group of young adults in Nigeria

Dentinal sensitivity among a selected group of young adults in Nigeria

The prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity in general dental practices in the northwest United States

Epidemiology of dentin hypersensitivity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About