4.1 Article

Factors associated with missing teeth in the Brazilian elderly institutionalised population

Journal

GERODONTOLOGY
Volume 30, Issue 2, Pages 141-149

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2012.00655.x

Keywords

oral health; tooth loss; geriatric dentistry; institutionalised elderly; complete denture

Funding

  1. National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)
  2. Brazilian Ministry of Health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

doi:10.1111/j.1741-2358.2012.00655.x Factors associated with missing teeth in the Brazilian elderly institutionalised population Objective: Identify factors associated with missing teeth in the elderly institutionalised population in Brazil. Methodology: Cross-sectional study of elderly institutionalised Brazilians with 1192 subjects. A questionnaire was applied as well as an epidemiological survey of oral health conditions in accordance with WHO. Factorial analysis was carried out with variables related to missing teeth, as well as the Fisher's exact test, chi-squared test and multiple logistic regression. Results: Mean age was 76.3 (+/- 9.8), 53.5% (638) of subjects were women and 717 (60.2) were dependent. Mean of Decayed Missing and Filled Teeth Index (DMFT index) was 29.4 (+/- 4.9). The subjects that did not use upper and lower dentures were 61.5% (732) and 79.2% (944), respectively. Median number of missing teeth per person was 27.88 (+/- 6.8) with a mean of 4 (+/- 6.6) teeth present and 2.4 (+/- 4.5) caries-free teeth. Factors associated with missing teeth following multivariate analysis were: age, sex, self-assessment of oral health, access to health services, type of institution and area of the country. Conclusions: High level of tooth loss and low level of rehabilitation demonstrate precarious oral health. It is therefore necessary to improve institutional access mechanisms to public health facilities for the institutionalised elderly.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available