Showing papers on "Oral hygiene published in 1968"

The periodontal condition of institutionalized children; improvement through oral hygiene*

Abstract: If time and expense can be managed, the periodontal condition of mongoloid children can be improved.

The relationship of cariostasis, oral hygiene, and past caries experience in children receiving three sprays annually with acidulated phosphate-fluoride: three-year results

Abstract: Children given three sprays annually with a weak acidulated phosphate-fluoride solution showed an average reduction in new DMF surfaces of 13 to 18% at the end of three years. Caries increments in both treated and control subjects were found to be dependent on oral hygiene status

The design of clinical studies of oral hygiene

Abstract: Studies involving the evaluation of the status of oral hygiene have appeared in the literature with increased frequency during the past decade. Most of these studies can be grouped into two types: (1) Studies of oral hygiene status in relation to dental caries and periodontal disease; (2) studies of the effectiveness of the use of various techniques, procedures, and devices for cleaning the teeth. The first group dealt with large numbers of people, and the oral hygiene data were usually adjunctive to the disease data. Most of those in the second group dealt with a relatively small number of patients, and the evaluation of oral hygiene was of primary importance. This paper focuses on the second group. The term “oral hygiene” in this context is used to mean the status of oral cleanliness, and not the practice of cleaning the mouth. Clinical studies of oral cleanliness usually are primarily concerned with short-term observations of the accumulation or removal of soft deposits on the exposed surfaces of the teeth. Therefore, this paper deals almost exclusively with this problem and is not concerned with the calcified deposits. Perhaps the central and the most critical issue in the design of clinical studies of oral hygiene is the problem of assessing the status of cleanliness. A great variety of approaches to this problem has been used. Many have been inadequate for the purposes for which they have been applied, mainly because of ill-defined or overlapping criteria. As a result, it is not only difficult to evaluate the significance of the findings of these studies, but it is almost impossible to reproduce them. Almost all methods used for assessing oral cleanliness have been designed to assign each person to one of several degrees of cleanliness because a dichotomous arrangement such as “yes” or “no”-‘‘clean’’ or “dirty”-would be meaningless. Some of these approaches have been based on the assignment of individuals to one of three or four categories of cleanliness that were not defined but described simply as “good,” “fair,” or “poor.” Others, on the basis of written criteria, have attempted to assign numerical values to different levels of hygiene. A review of some of the methods of assessing oral hygiene that have been reported in the literature provides a backdrop for recommending procedures for use in the future. In 1933 Brodsky,’ in a study of dental caries, classified oral hygiene as “good,” “fair,” “moderate,” or “poor,” based on the amount of dental plaque. In the same year, McRae‘ graded stain as “none,” “some,” and “much,” and used the same undefined categories for calculus.

Dental assisting–oral hygiene training: a model program

Abstract: The intent of the curriculum at the University of Pittsburgh is to demonstrate that a qualified person can learn the fundamentals of dental assisting, dental prophylaxis, patient education, and laboratory technics in a reasonable period of time. A dentist can then be provided with an assistant who could begin to practice the entire range of skills in auxiliary service. Courses for the 22-month program are described in detail.