4.6 Article

Oral hygiene, periodontal health and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 45-52

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01808.x

关键词

case-control study; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; exacerbations; oral hygiene; periodontitis; risk factors

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30872878]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Beijing [7093120]
  3. Beijing Science and Technology Programme Fund [Z101107050210031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To assess the associations of oral hygiene and periodontal health with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. Material and Methods: In total, 392 COPD patients were divided into frequent and infrequent exacerbation (>= 2 times and <2 times in last 12 months) groups. Their lung function and periodontal status were examined. Information on oral hygiene behaviours was obtained by interview. Results: In the univariate analysis, fewer remaining teeth, high plaque index (PLI) scores, low tooth brushing times, and low regular supra-gingival scaling were significantly associated with COPD exacerbations (all p-values <0.05). After adjustment for age, gender, body mass index, COPD severity and dyspnoea severity, the associations with fewer remaining teeth (p = 0.02), high PLI scores (p = 0.02) and low tooth brushing times (p = 0.008) remained statistically significant. When stratified by smoking, fewer remaining teeth (OR = 2.05, 95% CI: 1.04-4.02) and low tooth brushing times (OR = 4.90, 95% CI: 1.26-19.1) among past smokers and high PLI scores (OR = 3.43, 95% CI: 1.19-9.94) among never smokers were significantly associated with COPD exacerbations. Conclusions: Fewer remaining teeth, high PLI scores, and low tooth brushing times are significant correlates of COPD exacerbations, indicating that improving periodontal health and oral hygiene may be a potentially preventive strategy against COPD exacerbations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据