Trends in prevalence of complete tooth loss among Australians, 1979–2002

Sanders, Anne E.; Slade, Gary D.; Carter, Knute D.; Stewart, Judith

doi:10.1111/j.1467-842x.2004.tb00045.x

Cited by 67 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One possible cohort difference between these two times that may explain the apparent change is reduced dental disease 19 which may impact on learning experiences and perceptions of going to the dentist. Another possibility is that the changes are due to the dramatic reductions in edentulism in Australia [19][20][21] as edentulous people have been found to have lower dental fear than dentate people.…”

Section: Dental Fear Prevalencementioning

confidence: 99%

The extent and nature of dental fear and phobia in Australia

Armfield

2010

Australian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: For the general dental practitioner, fearful patients are harder and more stressful to treat and are most likely to attend irregularly. This study presents updated and refined dental fear and phobia prevalence estimates in Australia as well as information on the nature of dental fear and phobia. Methods: A total of 1084 Australian adults (response rate = 71.7%) completed a mailed questionnaire. The survey contained four measures of dental fear and phobia, as well as questions regarding potentially anxiety-eliciting dental stimuli and past aversive dental experiences. Results: The prevalence of high dental fear ranged from 7.8% to 18.8%, and more incapacitating dental phobia from 0.9% to 5.4%, depending upon the scale, cut-point and specific criteria used. Dental phobia was significantly associated with blood-injection-injury (BII) concerns. The cost of dental treatment was endorsed as the most anxiety-eliciting dental situation (64.5%), followed by fear of needles ⁄ injections (46.0%) and painful or uncomfortable procedures (42.9%). Anxiety-eliciting stimuli and the type of aversive dental experiences varied significantly by gender, age, income, education, language spoken at home and dental visiting frequency. Conclusions: High dental fear and dental phobia are common in Australia although prevalence estimates are highly dependent on both the scale and cut-points used.

show abstract

Section: Dental Fear Prevalencementioning

confidence: 99%

The extent and nature of dental fear and phobia in Australia

Armfield

2010

Australian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10,11 The differential in caries-related edentulous rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities for cohort c was obtained from the National Oral Health Survey (NOHS) 1987-88 12 (this study was conceived and executed prior to the publication of the National Survey of Adult Oral Health 2004-06). 13 The number of people in cohort c at time t requiring periodontal treatment N (P c,t,N ) was calculated as:…”

Section: Estimation Of Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The proportion of dentate people in cohort c, at time t, was estimated by subtracting the proportion of edentulous people from the total number of dentate people. 10,11 The costs of lost productivity were estimated using data from wave 1 Final averted costs were quantified as the product of these three parameters: effectiveness of CWF, annual caries increment, and the cost of a carious surface.…”

Section: Cost Of a Carious Surfacementioning

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

“…[2][3][4] Edentulism is related to the deterioration in the systemic health of the aged 27 and is associated with reduced quality of life. 28 A Ac ck kn no ow wl le ed dg ge em me en nt ts s…”

Section: DI Is Sc Cu Us Ss Si Io On Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence and Associated Factors of Edentulism among Elderly Muslims in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia

Shamdol¹,

Ismail²,

Hamzah³

et al. 2008

J Islam Med Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I In nt tr ro od du uc ct ti io on n E dentulism, or complete tooth loss, is prevalent worldwide among older people. 1 Earlier studies have shown that edentulism affects the health and the overall quality of life of the elderly. 2 Complete and partial tooth loss is associated with reduction in physical, psychological and social function, and the ability to chew. It also increases disability. 3 The edentulous elderly tend to consume fewer than two-thirds of the recommended nutri-P Pr re ev va al le en nc ce e a an nd d A As ss so oc ci ia at te ed d F Fa ac ct to or rs s o of f E Ed de en nt tu ul li is sm m a am mo on ng g E El ld de er rl ly y M Mu us sl li im ms s i in n K Ko ot ta a B Bh ha ar ru u, , K Ke el la an nt ta an n, , M Ma al la ay ys si ia a A Ab bs st tr ra ac ct t O Ob bj je ec ct ti iv ve e: : T To o d de et te er rm mi in ne e t th he e p pr re ev va al le en nc ce e o of f e ed de en nt tu ul li is sm m a an nd d i it ts s a as ss so oc ci ia at te ed d f fa ac c--t to or rs s a am mo on ng g e el ld de er rl ly y M Mu us sl li im ms s i in n K Ko ot ta a B Bh ha ar ru u, , K Ke el la an nt ta an n, , M Ma al la ay ys si ia a. . S St tu ud dy y d de es si ig gn n: : A A c cr ro os ss s--s se ec ct ti io on na al l s st tu ud dy y w wa as s c co on nd du uc ct te ed d w wi it th h 5 50 06 6 r ra an nd do om ml ly y s se el le ec ct te ed d c co om mm mu un ni it ty y--d dw we el ll li in ng g e el ld de er rl ly y p pa at ti ie en nt ts s a ag ge ed d 6 60 0 y ye ea ar rs s a an nd d o ol ld de er r i in n t th he e d di is s--t tr ri ic ct t o of f B Ba ad da an ng g, , K Ko ot ta a B Bh ha ar ru u, , K Ke el la an nt ta an n. . T Th he e p pa ar rt ti ic ci ip pa an nt ts s w wh ho o c co on ns se en nt te ed d w we er re e i in nt te er rv vi ie ew we ed d f fo or r s so oc ci io od de em mo og gr ra ap ph hi ic c i in nf fo or rm ma at ti io on n a an nd d f fo ol ll lo ow we ed d b by y a an n o or ra al l e ex xa am mi i--n na at ti io on n t to o r re ec co or rd d e ed de en nt tu ul li is sm m. . R Re es su ul lt ts s: : T Th he e p pr re ev va al le en nc ce e o of f e ed de en nt tu ul li is sm m w wa as s 5 55 5. .9 9% % ( (9 95 5% % C CI I= =5 51 1. .6 67 7, , 6 60 0. .5 50 0) ). . M Mu ul lt ti ip pl le e l lo og gi is st ti ic c r re eg gr re es ss si io on n a an na al ly ys se es s s sh ho ow we ed d t th ha at t o ol ld de er r a ag ge e g gr ro ou up ps s o of f t th he e e el ld de er r--l ly y, , 7 70 0--7 79 9 y ye ea ar rs s a an nd d 8 80 0 y ye ea ar rs s a an nd d o ol ld de er r, , w we er re e m mo or re e l li ik ke el ly y t to o b be e e ed de en nt tu ul lo ou us s, , w wi it th h a an n o od dd ds s r ra at ti io o ( (O OR R) ) o of f 1 1. .9 9 ( (9 95 5% % c co on nf fi id de en nc ce e i in nt te er rv va al l [ [C CI I] ] = =1 1. .2 2, , 3 3. .1 1) ) a an nd d O OR R= =4 4. .0 0 ( (9 95 5% % C CI I= =2 2. .0 0, , 8 8. .1 1) ) r re es sp pe ec ct ti iv ve el ly y, , c co om mp pa ar re ed d t to o t th he e y yo ou un ng ge er r e el ld de er rl ly y 6 60 0--...

show abstract

Trends in prevalence of complete tooth loss among Australians, 1979–2002

Abstract: Edentulism is a key indicator of the oral health status of populations and is associated with reduced quality of life. Objective: To describe temporal trends in the prevalence of edentulism in the Australian adult population.

Cited by 67 publications

References 18 publications

The extent and nature of dental fear and phobia in Australia

The extent and nature of dental fear and phobia in Australia

The impact of changing dental needs on cost savings from fluoridation

Prevalence and Associated Factors of Edentulism among Elderly Muslims in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About