Community Dental Health 

About: Community Dental Health is an academic journal published by FDI World Dental Press. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Population & Health care. It has an ISSN identifier of 0265-539X. Over the lifetime, 1575 publications have been published receiving 37903 citations. The journal is also known as: CDH.

Development and evaluation of the Oral Health Impact Profile.

Abstract: The capacity of dental clinicians and researchers to assess oral health and to advocate for dental care has been hampered by limitations in measurements of the levels of dysfunction, discomfort and disability associated with oral disorders The purpose of this research was to develop and test the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP), a scaled index of the social impact of oral disorders which draws on a theoretical hierarchy of oral health outcomes Forty nine unique statements describing the consequences of oral disorders were initially derived from 535 statements obtained in interviews with 64 dental patients The relative importance of statements within each of seven conceptual subscales was assessed by 328 persons using Thurstone's method of paired comparisons The consistency of their judgements was confirmed (Kendall's mu, P < 005) The reliability of the instrument was evaluated in a cohort of 122 persons aged 60 years and over Internal reliability of six subscales was high (Cronbach's alpha, 070-083) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 042-077) demonstrated stability Validity was examined using longitudinal data from the 60 years and over cohort where the OHIP's capacity to detect previously observed associations with perceived need for a dental visit (ANOVA, p < 005 in five subscales) provided evidence of its construct validity The Oral Health Impact Profile offers a reliable and valid instrument for detailed measurement of the social impact of oral disorders and has potential benefits for clinical decision-making and research

Risk factors for dental caries in young children: a systematic review of the literature.

Abstract: Objective To conduct a systematic review of the literature on risk factors for dental caries in deciduous teeth of children aged six years and under, to give a scientific framework for the international collaborative studies on inequalities in childhood caries. Method Accepted guidelines were followed. Studies were identified by electronic searching and reviewed on the basis of key words, title and abstract by two reviewers to assess whether inclusion criteria were met. Copies of all articles were obtained and assessed for quality according to the study design. Results 1029 papers were identified from the electronic search, 260 met the prima facie inclusion criteria. 183 were excluded once full copies of these papers were obtained. Of the 77 studies included, 43 were cross sectional, 19 cohort studies, 8 case control studies and 7 interventional studies. Few obtained the highest quality scores. 106 risk factors were significantly related to the prevalence or incidence of caries. Conclusion There is a shortage of high quality studies using the optimum study design, i.e. a longitudinal study. The evidence suggests that children are most likely to develop caries if Streptococcus Mutans is acquired at an early age, although this may be partly compensated by other factors such as good oral hygiene and a non- cariogenic diet. Diet and oral hygiene may interact so that if there is a balance of ‘good’ habits by way of maintaining good plaque control and ‘bad’ habits by way of having a cariogenic diet, the development of caries may be controlled.

The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms.

Abstract: The Corah Dental Anxiety Scale (CDAS) has been used extensively in epidemiology and clinical research. It is brief and is claimed to have good psychometric properties. However, it does not include any reference to local anaesthetic injections, a major focus of anxiety for many. Also, the multiple choice answers for three of the four questions are not clearly in order of severity of anxiety as the CDAS intends. The answers differ among the questions thus making them difficult to compare. They include descriptions of physiological reactions and anxiety, confusing two loosely related components of the experience. The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) described, added a question on anxiety about oral injections. New multiple choice answers, in clear order of anxiety and the same for each question, were provided. Twenty five dental personnel all confirmed independently the order of the multiple choice answers for the MDAS. They disagreed among themselves however, about the appropriate sequence for the answers denoting intermediate anxiety in the CDAS. Therefore the CDAS, unlike the MDAS, can provide meaningful measures only of extremely high or extremely low dental anxiety. Of 1392 subjects tested, 13 per cent expressed extreme anxiety about injections on the MDAS but were only 'fairly' or less anxious about drilling. Thus, the CDAS, unlike the MDAS, must overlook subjects very afraid of injections only. Data confirm the high reliability and validity of the MDAS and provide norms for phobic and nonphobic subjects.