STAN ZDROWIA JAMY USTNEJ A ZACHOWANIA ZDROWOTNE

Katarzyna Bialoszewska1 , Magdalena Lazarewicz1, Damian Świeczkowski2, Natalia Cwalina2, Piotr Merks3,
Artur Białoszewski4, Krzysztof Owczarek1

1DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL PSYCHOLOGY AND MEDICAL COMMUNICATION, MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW, POLAND

2FIRST DEPARTMENT OF CARDIOLOGY, MEDICAL UNIVERSITY IN GDANSK, GDANSK, POLAND

3DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICAL TECHNOLOGY, COLLEGIUM MEDICUM IN BYDGOSZCZ, NICOLAUS COPERNICUS UNIVERSITY IN TORUN, TORUN, POLAND

4DEPARTMENT OF PREVENTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AND ALLERGOLOGY. MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW, WARSAW, POLAND

 

Abstract

The aim: To compare the patients’ self-evaluations of oral hygiene and oral health with the results of the clinical examination expressed using both the DMFT index (DT, MT, FT) and the API index; and to evaluate the relationship between the patients’ general health behaviors and their oral health status.

Material and Methods: 78 first-time dental patients (40 females, 38 males; Mage=40,7, SD=14.4) participated in the study. Prior to the initial dental visit, a questionnaire consisting of statements measuring self-rated oral health, hygiene and the patient’s knowledge about the oral cavity and the Health Behaviour Questionnaire (HBI) was administered. DMFT index, dental treatment index (DTI), and Approximal Plaque Index (API) were assessed upon intraoral examination.

Results: The analyses revealed that the self-declared level of knowledge about the oral cavity was significantly related to the API (p=0.004), to the number of DT (p<0.001) and to the number of FT (p<0.001). There was a correlation  between the patients’ declared state of the oral cavity and number of DT (p<0.001) and FT (p<0.001). The total HBI score correlated positively with FT (p=0.049). Health behaviours were related to the self-evaluation of oral care (p≤0.19), oral condition (p≤0.001), and knowledge of the oral cavity (p≤0.008).

Conclusions: There is a significant relationship between the self-declared condition of the patients’ oral cavity and their oral care and DMFT index. The higher the level of a patient’s declared health behaviours, the better both the self-evaluated, and objectively assessed, state of the oral cavity.

 

Streszczenie

Cel pracy: Porównanie samooceny pacjentów w zakresie higieny i zdrowia jamy ustnej z wynikami badania wewnątrzustnego wyrażonymi za pomocą wskaźnika DMFT (DT, MT, FT), jak i wskaźnika API a także ocena związku między ogólnymi zachowaniami zdrowotnymi pacjentów a stanem zdrowia jamy ustnej.

Materiał i metody: W badaniu wzięło udział 78 pierwszorazowych pacjentów poradni stomatologicznych (40 kobiet, 38 mężczyzn, Mage =40,7, SD =14,4). Przed wizytą badani zostali poproszeni o wypełnienie kwestionariusza składającego się z pytań na temat deklarowanego zdrowia jamy ustnej, higieny wiedzy pacjenta na temat jamy ustnej oraz kwestionariusza zachowań zdrowotnych (IZZ, Inwentarz Zachowań Zdrowotnych). Na podstawie badania wewnątrzustnego wyliczono wskaźnik DMFT, wskaźnik leczenia stomatologicznego (DTI) i wskaźnik płytki nazębnej (API).

Wyniki: Analizy pokazały, że poziom deklarowanej wiedzy o jamie ustnej jest istotnie związany API (p =0,004) z liczbą zębów, z próżnicą (DT) (p <0,001) oraz liczbą wypełnień zębów (FT)(p <0,001). Występowała korelacja między deklarowanym stanem pacjentów jamy ustnej a liczbą DT (p <0,001) i FT (p <0,001). Całkowity wynik IZZ korelował dodatnio z FT (p = 0,049). Zachowania zdrowotne związane były z deklarowaną higieną jamy ustnej (p≤0,19), stanem zdrowia jamy ustnej (p≤0,001) oraz wiedzą na jej temat (p≤0,008).

Wnioski: Istnieje istotna zależność między deklarowanym stanem zdrowia i higieny jamy ustnej a wskaźnikiem DMFT. Im wyższy poziom deklarowanych przez pacjenta zachowań zdrowotnych, tym lepszy zarówno deklarowany, jak i obiektywnie oceniany stan jamy ustnej.

 

Wiad Lek 2018, 71, 7,

 

INTRODUCTION

The association between proper health behaviours and oral health is not only an important part of scientific deliberations, but also one of the most essential parts of routine dental practice [1, 2].It has been scientifically proven that oral health is a vital component of general health and the overall well-being of an individual [3].

Oral health depends on numerous factors such as one’s proper hygienic behaviours, diet, genetic characteristics, the effectiveness of dental care, as well as various environmental, political, social and economic factors [4] and social status [5]. In addition, gender and the level of education completed play an important role in oral health. For instance, women are more likely than men to obtain medical and dental check-ups [6], while an increase in the level of education correlates with an increased frequency in performing proper health behaviors, such as careful tooth brushing [7, 8].

Another factor that affects the state of the oral cavity is the type of food consumed and the way in which patients follow the rules of healthy eating. A Swedish epidemiological review indicated that 45% of individuals between 3−20 years old consumed soft drinks every day [9].Knowledge about the impact of an unhealthy diet on dentition is an important factor in caries epidemiology. Dietary habits such as drinking sugar-containing beverages between main meals or regularly consuming them at night is an important determinant for caries experience in childhood. On the other hand, the type of food consumed may be affected by the belief that hard and sticky foods can damage the teeth and even break the crown of the tooth, which may lead to patients avoiding certain foods that are in fact important to their health [10]. The decision not to eat certain types of food may be directly connected to the condition of the oral cavity and the occurrence of pain when biting down, a symptom that occurs in certain diseases, such as gangrene of the dental pulp. The reason for this belief is therefore disputable, as pain may result directly from poor oral health or from dental fear. The relationship between high levels of anxiety/fear and the bad condition of the oral cavity has been well established [11, 12].

Despite socio-economic, organizational and cultural changes in Poland in the past 30 years, positive oral health behaviors of rural residents are still poorer in comparison to urban inhabitants [13]. Moreover, 37% of Mazovian province residents failed to see the need to visit a dentist at least once a year [14]. Carries epidemiology results showed a high prevalence of edentulism (27%) among patients ≥45 years of age [15] and that 64.4% of children 6 years of age had 4 or more teeth damaged by dental carries [16] Therefore, it seems necessary to investigate the factors related to the poor state of the oral cavity within the Polish population.

Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the patients’ self-reported oral condition and oral care status, with the results of the intraoral clinical examination expressed via the DMFT index and API index. The second goal was to investigate the relationship between patients’ opinions regarding their general health behaviours and their oral health status. The final purpose of the present study was to examine determinants of health behaviours in the studied population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We enrolled patients who fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: i) first-time patients, ii) of both sexes, iii) regardless of race, iv) 18 to 75 years old, v) who gave informed consent. We excluded patients who had language difficulties and/or were diagnosed with mental disorders (apart from dental phobia) or edentulism. Patients who completed the questionnaire unreliably (with missing data) were also excluded.

Patients were informed both orally and in writing about the purpose and form of the study and were asked to express their informed consent to participate in the study. Prior to the dental examination, patients were invited to fill in an anonymous questionnaire consisting of authorial and standardized parts. The authorial questionnaire contained six questions concerning socio-demographic data (age, sex, marital status, place of residence, occupation, level of education) and three oral-health related questions regarding their self-rated oral condition (How do you assess your oral health?), oral care (How do you assess your oral hygiene?) and knowledge about the condition of the oral cavity (How do you assess your knowledge about the oral cavity?) using the 5 point Likert’s scale.

Health behaviors were assessed by use of the Health Behaviour Inventory (HBI) by Zygfryd Juczyński. HBI is composed of 24 statements measuring nutrition habits, preventive behaviors (e.g. following doctor’s recommendations, searching for information about health and disease), health practices (e.g. sleeping habits, physical activity) and positive psychological attitude (e.g. avoiding too strong emotions, stress, depressive situations). Frequencies of these health-related activities are assessed on a five-point Likert’s scale ranging from 1 – almost never to 5 – almost always. Apart from the above four specific subscales, a General Index can be calculated as a sum of the subscale’s results. The higher the numerical score, the greater the propensity for the healthy behaviour [17]. The reliability coefficients for HBI were 0.85 for the general index and varied between 0.60 and 0.65 for its’ four subscales. During the clinical dental examination, caries intensity (DMFT index, and the individual components DT-decay teeth, MT-missing teeth, FT-Filled teeth), Dental Treatment Index (DTI) and Approximal Plaque Index (API) were assessed [18].

The results were statistically analyzed using the SPSS statistical package. Apart from descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation coefficient, Kendall rank correlation coefficient, Student’s t-test, Mann–Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis H Test were applied. In the statistical analysis, the level of significance was estimated at p≤0.05.

The study design was approved by the Bioethics Committee of the Medical University of Warsaw (KB/73/2013).

RESULTS

Study Characteristics

Initially, 150 patients were enrolled in our research study, however, based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, 78 patients were excluded from the final study group. The results were obtained from 40 women and 38 men, aged 18-76 (M=40.65, SD=14.4). 78.2% of the participants were in a relationship, and 19.2% were single. The majority of respondents had a secondary education (42.3%), while the least – a primary education (7.7%). Many respondents were manual workers (37.2%) or employed in the private sector (21.8%). Most of the respondents lived in a city up to 100 000 thousand inhabitants (67.9%) or in a city between 101-500 thousand inhabitants (15.4%). The detailed socio-demographic characteristics of the study group are summarized in the Supplementary File.

The participants received dental treatment either every six months (26.9%), once a year (19.2%), or once every three months (15.4%). Most patients assessed their oral health as average (46.2%) or good (21.8%). Patients usually estimated their knowledge about oral health as average (29%) or good (27%), with only 15.4% of participants describing their level of knowledge as poor.

According to the results of the clinical dental examination performed by a trained professional and aimed at an objective assessment of oral health using API, 69.2% of the patients presented inadequate hygiene, 21.8% sufficient, only 5.1% good while 3.8% of participants appraised their oral hygiene as optimum (Supplementary File). The frequency of tooth decay was evaluated at 73.1%. The mean value of DMFT was estimated at 14.87. In the whole sample, the mean number of DT was 3.53, MT 5.23 and of FT 5,96. The average value of DTI was 0.627. The data is summarized in the Supplementary File.

The subjective assessment of oral hygiene correlated significantly with education (tau=0.310; p=0.002). Gender and age were found to be significant factors differentiating the participants on the levels of HBI subscales. Statistically significant differences were observed between men and women in the context of eating habits (t=2.62; p=0.011) and preventive behaviors (t=2.63; p=0.01). Detailed data is presented in Table 1. Age was significantly correlated with eating habits (r=0.239; p=0.35), preventive behaviors (r=0.347; p=0.02) and health practices (r=0.276; p=0.14) but not with positive psychological attitude (r=0.045; p=0.697).

Main Findings

Table 2 presents the relationship between health behaviours and self-rated oral care, condition of the oral cavity and patient knowledge about oral health. There was a significant positive correlation between proper eating habits and the respondents’ self-assessment of the condition of their oral cavity (τ=0.325; p≤0.001) and knowledge about oral health (τ=0.197; p=0.027). Preventive behaviours significantly correlated with self-evaluation of oral care (tau=0.209; p=0.19), condition of the oral cavity (τ=0.305; p≤0.001) and knowledge about oral health (τ=0.235; p=0.008). Moreover, a statistically significant relationship was found between health practices and self-rated condition of the oral cavity (τ=0.193; p=0.03) and knowledge about it (τ=0.172; p=0.054). No significant relationships were found between positive psychological attitude and the three questions about self-rated oral health.

The general HBI index value was 77.0±12.56 and it correlated with FT (t=0.15; p=0.049). Higher levels of preventive behaviors were associated with the number of MT (τ=0.204; p=0.014). No significant differences were found between DMFT index components and proper diet habits, positive psychological attitude and health practices (Tab. 3).

Table 4 presents the relationship between self-assessment of oral care, the condition of the oral cavity, knowledge about oral health and caries intensity, and API. Self-assessed oral care, the condition of the oral cavity and knowledge about oral health negatively correlated with the number of DT and positively correlated with the number of FT. There was also a statistically significant negative relationship between knowledge about oral health and API (τ=-0.273; p=0.004).

DISCUSSION

In our research, 69.2% of patients presented with inadequate dental hygiene. The intensity of caries in the study group (DMFT=14.87) was lower than the results of research conducted by Hilt et al. (2012) in the Lodz Voivodship (DMFT=19.28) [19]. Additionally, Woche-Sobańska and Borysewicz-Lewicka (2007) presented a study in which the average number of teeth with caries ranged from 2.04 in persons over 74 years of age to 4.68 in the age group of 19 – 34 years old. In Poland, this number ranges from 3.66 (in Lublin Voivodship) to 4.44 (in Podlaskie Voivodship) and in the Mazowieckie Voivodship, it was estimated at 4.11 [20]. Therefore, our results do not differ from that of other groups of patients within the Polish population.

Our study found that a higher education is related to higher self- rated oral care. This is in line with other studies which have previously established a positive relationship between the level of education and the state of oral health [21−22]. Moreover, the objective condition of the oral cavity, as assessed by the API index, significantly and positively correlated with the declared level of knowledge about oral health.

We also identified a significant relationship between health behaviours and age. Deeks et al (2009) reported that 27% of older participants were more likely to undergo an annual health check-up as compared to younger participants [23]. Bellock and Breslow’s research (1972) also confirmed this relationship [24].

We observed statistically significant differences between men and women in their health behaviours, in terms of eating habits and preventive behaviours. Women achieved higher scores in all of the above mentioned domains. It is worth acknowledging that Sygit-Kowalkowska et al also observed a similar relationship between eating habits and gender in her study [25]. Having a positive psychological attitude (among others; avoiding strong stressors, negative emotions and depressing situations) did not display any statistically significantly correlations in this field. Most importantly, significant correlations were seen between the state of the oral cavity as evaluated by the dentist, the self-rated state of the oral cavity and related health behaviours were found in our research study. Analysis revealed that the higher the mean number of filled teeth, the better the self-declared oral condition and oral care status. In the study conducted by Locker et al. (2005), it was found that people with higher levels of tooth loss, periodontal disease and caries experience assess their health condition as sufficient or bad, similarly to our findings [26]. The cognitive process that leads to self-evaluation of oral health is very complex and may be influenced by factors such as physical health, health behaviours and sociodemographic characteristics [26−28].

In the research by Jankowska-Polańska et al (2016) the general score of HBI index in a group of patients suffering from hypertension was 79.4±8.8 (moderate disease acceptance) and 87.8 ± 8.7 (high disease acceptance), both which were higher than in our studied population ( 77±12,5) [29]. The general HBI index in a studied group is related to the mean number of filled teeth. Additionally, statistical analysis revealed a positive correlation between the number of missing teeth and preventive behaviours, which may indicate specific Polish attitudes and mistaken beliefs towards tooth extractions and general dental health. .This belief may have some feedback in carries epidemiology, in which Poland proves to have the highest edentulousness among patients from analyzed territories [15].

Based on this research, it can be concluded that the quality and number of health practices in everyday life is related to the self-assessment of oral health, the level of dental care and the patient’s knowledge about oral health. In other words, improving the knowledge avaliable about oral health and self-assessments of the condition of the oral cavity may have a positive influence on a patient’s eating habits and preventive behaviours. In our study group, only 2.6% patients declared that they have a very good level of knowledge about oral health, while 15.4% described their knowledge as bad. These results contrast with some previous conclusions. For example Małkiewicz et al. (2012) conducted research among children’s guardians in which guardians estimated their knowledge of oral care as sufficient (76.1%) or very high (16.8%) [30].

Our research does have some limitations. Firstly, our research was conducted among a limited number of patients. However, we believe that this work may serve as a starting point for further, more representative studies. Moreover, information about the specific type of dental services received during the visit when the data was collected, was not noted. This may have had an impact on the patient’s perspective. Among the patients involved in our study, 39 individuals were excluded due to edentulism, as there was no possibility to determine the API indicator. This resulted in a relatively young group of participants (40.65 years old on average) included in our cohort.

Our research suggests a strong need for the implementation of health promoting campaigns and educational initiatives aimed at improving oral health in Poland. Our research highlights how important the educational role of the dentist is, and how they should try to improve their patients’ self-awareness about dental care. It also proves that general health behaviours have an impact on the state of the oral cavity and are strongly related to age and gender. Further research in this matter is warranted, and more representative studies are needed.

REFERENCES

1. Kumar S, Tadakamadla J, Johnson NW. Effect of Toothbrushing Frequency on Incidence and Increment of Dental Caries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Dent Res. 201695:1230-6. doi: 10.1177/0022034516655315.

2. Straub-Morarend CL, Marshall TA, Holmes DC, Finkelstein MW. Toward defining dentists’ evidence-based practice: influence of decade of dental school graduation and scope of practice on implementation and perceived obstacles. J Dent Educ. 2013;77:137-135.

3. Kumar H, Behura SS, Ramachandra S, Nishat R, Dash KC, Mohiddin G. Oral health knowledge, attitude, and practices among dental and medical students in eastern India – a comparative study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2017;7:58-63.

4. Strużycka I, Małkowska A, Stopa J. Effectiveness of health promotion. Czas Stomat. 2005; 57(6):392-396.

5. Armfield JM, Spencer AJ, Stewart JF. Dental Fear in Australia: Who is Afraid of the dentist? Austral Dent J. 2006;51(1):85

6. Mamai-Homata E, Koletsi-Kounari H, Margaritis V. Gender differences in oral health status and behavior of Greek dental students: A meta-analysis of 1981, 2000, and 2010 data. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2016;6(1):60. doi:10.4103/2231-0762.175411.

7. Peker I, Alkurt MT. Oral Health Attitudes and Behavior among a Group of Turkish Dental Students. Eur J Dent. 2009;3(1):24-31

8. Neeraja R, Kayalvizhi G, Sangeetha P. Oral Health Attitudes and Behavior among a Group of Dental Students in Bangalore, India. Eur J Dent. 2011;5(2):163-167.

9. Hasselkvist A, Johansson A, Johansson AK. Dental erosion and soft drink consumption in Swedish children and adolescents and the development of a simplified erosion partial recording system. Swed Dent J. 2010;34(4):187-195.

10. Cohen SM, Fiske J, Newton JT. The impact of dental anxiety on daily living. BDJ 2000;189(7):385-390.

11. Kleinknecht RA, Klepac RK, Alexander AD. Origin and characteristics of fear of dentistry. JADA. 1973;86(4):842-8.

12. Hakeberg M, Berggren U, Gröndahl HG. A radiographic study of dental health in adult patients with dental anxiety. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1993;21(1):27-30.

13. Gaszyńska E, Wierzbicka M, Marczak M, Szatko F. Thirty years of evolution of oral health behaviours and dental caries in urban and rural areas in Poland. Annals Adricul Environment Med. 2014;21(3):557-61. doi: 10.5604/12321966.1120601.

14. Dubielecka M, Rusyan E, Zduniak A, Mielczarek A, Ratajska A, Lewandowska M. Patients’ Beliefs Regarding Dental Health Promotion. Psychology Reasearch. 2017;7(1):65-71. doi:10.17265/2159-5542/2017.01.007

15. Guarniozo-Herreno CC, Tsakos G, Sheiham A, Watt RG. Oral health and welfare state regiments: a cross- national analysis of European countries. Eur J Oral Sci. 2013;121:169-75. doi: 10.1111/eos.12049

16. Strużycka I, Maria Wierzbicka M, Jodkowska E, Rusyan E, Ganowicz E, Fidecki M. Oral Health and prophylactic-therapeutic needs of Children aged 6 years in Poland in 2012. Przegl Epidemiol. 2014;68:53-57.

17. Juczyński Z. Narzędzia pomiaru w promocji i psychologii zdrowia. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych PTP. 2012;149-55.

18. Lange DE, Lübbert H, Alai-Omid W. Über die Anwendungund die Korrelation verschiedener Gingivitis-und Plaque-Indices. Deutsch Zahnärztl Z. 1974;28:1239-1246

19. Hilt A, Rybarczyk-Townsend E, Lubowiedzka-Gontarek B, Wocha-Sobańska M. Problemy zdrowotne jamy ustnej 35–44-letnich mieszkańców województwa łódzkiego. Przegl Epidemiol. 2012;66(1):133-138.

20. Wocha-Sobańska M., Borysewicz-Lewicka M. Stomatologiczne potrzeby lecznicze ludności Polski w świetle epidemiologicznych badań wykonanych w 2003 roku w ramach programu „Miesiąc totalnie zdrowego uśmiechu”. Czas Stomatol. 2007;60(5):299-305.

21. Paulander J, Axelsson P, Lindhe J. Association between level of education and oral health status in 35-, 50-, 65- and 75-year-olds. J Clin Periodontol. 2003;30(8):697-704.

22. Bayraktar G, Kurtulus I Kazancioglu R et al. Effect of educational level on oral health in peritoneal and hemodialysis patients. Int J Dent. 2009;2009:159767. doi:10.1155/2009/159767. doi: 10.1155/2009/159767

23. Deeks A, Lombard C, Michelmore J, Teede H. The effects of gender and age on health related behaviors. BMC Public Health. 2009;9:213. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-213.

24. Bellock NB, Breslow L. Relationshios of physical health status and health practices. Preventive Medicine. 1972;1(3):409-421

25. Sygit-Kowalkowska E. Health Behaviour of people late adulthood-sociodemographic correlation and differencec between social enviroments. Rocz Pom Akad Med Szczec. 2013;59(1):103-113.

26. Locker D, Wexler E, Jokovic A. What do older adults’ global self-ratings of oral health measure? J Public Health Dent. 2005;65(3):146-152.

27. Xi Chen, Naorungroj S, Bouglas CE, Beck JD. Self-reported oral health and oral health behaviours in older adults in the last years of life. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med. 2013;68(10):1310-1315.

28. Ravaghi V, Underwood M, Marinho V, Eldridge S. Socioeconomic status and self-reported oral health in Iranian adolescents: the role of selected oral health behaviors and psychological factors. J Public Health Dent. 2012;72(3):198-207.

29. Jankowska-Polańska B, Blicharska K, Uchmanowicz I, Morisky DE. The influence of illness acceptance on the adherence to pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapy in patients with hypertension. European J Cardiovas Nursing. 2016;15(7):1-10.

30. Małkiewicz EH, Borkowska T, Wierzbicka M. Dental health awareness and health-promoting behaviors of child guardians, interested in prophylaxis programs. Probl Hig Epidemiol. 2012;93(1):90-96.

Conflict of interest:

The Authors declare no conflict of interest.

Corresponding author

Artur Z. Białoszewski

Department of Prevention of Environmental Hazards and Allergology

Medical University of Warsaw

ul. Banacha 1a, 02-097 Warszawa

e-mail: artur.bialoszewski@wum.edu.p

Received: 25.07.2018

Accepted: 10.10.2018

Table 1. Differences in health behaviours measured by the Health Behavior Inventory between female (n=40) and male (n=38) participants.

 

Gender

N

Mean (SD)

t

P

Proper eating habits

Women

40

3.33 (0.63)

2.622

0.011

Men

38

2.89 (0.83)

           

Preventive behaviours

Women

40

3.52 (0.60)

2.638

0.010

Men

38

3.10 (0.79)

           

Positive psychological attitude

Women

40

3.42 (0.50)

1.240

0.219

Men

38

3.26 (0.66)

           

Health practices

Women

40

3.07 (0.55)

0.614

0.541

Men

38

2.99 (0.70)

Table 2. Relationship between health behaviours measured by the Health Behavior Inventory and self-assessed oral care, condition of the oral cavity and knowledge about the condition of the oral cavity (N=78) – Kendall’s τ coefficient.

 

Oral hygiene

Condition of the oral cavity

Knowledge about oral health

Proper Eating Habits

0.143

0.325***

0.197*

Preventive behaviours

0.209*

0.305***

0.235**

Positive psychological attitude

0.098

0.152

0.090

Health practices

0.105

0.193*

0.172

*p≤.05

** p≤.01

*** p≤.001

Table 3. The relationship between health behaviours measured by Health Behaviour Inventory and DMFT index.( N=78)- ) – Kendall’s τ coefficient.

   

Mean DT

Mean MT

Mean FT

Mean DMFT

General HBI score

τ

–,155

,114

,158*

,113

Proper eating/dietary habits

τ

–,153

,029

,158

,094

Preventive behaviours

τ

–,133

,204*

,078

,146

Positive psychological attitude

τ

–,045

,066

,159

,089

Health practices

τ

–,087

,079

,070

,050

DT-decayed teeth

MT-missing teeth

FT-filled teeth

DMFT – decayed/ missing/ filled teeth

*p≤.05

** p≤.01

*** p≤.001

Table 4. Differences in self-assessment of the oral care, the condition of the oral cavity and knowledge about oral health dependent on the frequency of dental visits – Univariate Analysis of Variance.

 

Frequency of dental visits

N

Mean (SD)

F

p

Duncan

Oral care

once a year

15

3.46 (1.13)

1.63

0.189

 

once every 6 months

21

3.28 (0.64)

 

once every 3 months

12

3.41 (0.79)

 

when I feel pain

30

2.90 (1.09)

 
             

The condition of oral cavity

once a year

15

3.26 (1.28)

2.66

0.054

4<1

once every 6 months

21

3.09 (0.70)

 

once every 3 months

12

3.08 (1.00)

 

when I feel pain

30

2.53 (0.90)

 
             

Knowledge about oral health

once a year

15

3.66 (1.05)

6.65

<0.001

4<1,2,3

once every 6 months

21

3.76 (0.83)

once every 3 months

12

3.58 (0.79)

When I feel pain

30

2.80 (0.81)

Frequency of dental visits :

1. Once a year

2. Once every 6 months

3. Once every 3 months

4. When I feel pain

Table 5. The relationship between self-assessment of the oral care, the condition of the oral cavity, knowledge about oral health and caries intensity and Approximal Plaque Index (N=78) – Kendall’s τ coefficient.

 

Mean DT

Mean MT

Mean FT

Mean DMFT

API

Oral Hygiene

-.331***

-.122

0.324***

-0.113

-0.154

The condition of oral cavity

-.411***

-.067

0.344***

-.035

-.077

Knowledge about oral health

-.388***

0.045

0.320***

0.010

-.273**

DT-decayed teeth

MT-missing teeth

FT-filled teeth

DMFT – decayed/ missing/ filled teeth

API – Approximal Plaque Index

*p≤.05

** p≤.01

*** p≤.001