Search

Background: The workplace is an ideal—and priority—setting for health promotion activities. Developing and implementing workplace health promotion interventions, including oral health promotion activities, can help create health‐supporting workplace environments. Objective: To pilot workplace oral health promotion activities among staff working in the aged care sector, report their impact and explore participants' views on the factors that contribute to participation and effectiveness. Methods: This study comprised three phases: (i) the development and face validation of the resources, (ii) a 3‐h educational session and (iii) five interview sessions with participants 4–6 weeks following the education session. The recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Results: Eleven community‐aged care workforce were invited to five feedback sessions. Ten participants were female and ranged in age from 18 to 64. All participants gave favourable comments about the content and delivery of the training session and accompanying resources. The participants felt that the benefits of WOHP include improved staff knowledge, awareness and oral care routine, the ability to share (and put into practice) the gained knowledge and information with their dependants, a lower risk of having poor oral health that adversely affects their well‐being and work tasks, and potentially beneficial impacts on the organization's staff roster. Their attendance in the WOHP was facilitated by being paid to attend and scheduling the sessions during work time. Future WOHP suggestions include the possibility of a one‐stop dental check‐up at the workplace or staff dental care discounts from local dental practitioners and combining oral health with other health promotion activities. Conclusions: Planning and implementing WOHP was deemed acceptable and feasible in this study context and successfully achieved short‐term impacts among community‐aged care workers. Appropriate times and locations, organizational arrangements and a variety of delivery options contributed to successful programme planning and implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To determine the circumstances in which oral health promotion (OHP) in General Dental Practice is at its most effective, a systematic review was conducted to identify, critically appraise and synthesize the available evidence. The research question was: Is oral health promotion within dental practice effective and how can its effects be optimized? Systematic searches of 20 online resources (including Ovid Medline and Embase) were conducted. A call for evidence was also issued, and citation lists of other relevant systematic reviews were included. All studies published since 1994 which were set in the context of general dental practice and investigated promoting good oral health in adult or child patients were considered. 44 studies reported in 52 papers were included in the review. The evidence was heterogeneous and the quality of reporting was variable. Results showed that oral health promotion based on behavioural and psychological models was effective for improving oral health. Verbal advice affected knowledge and reported behaviour, written advice promoted oral health knowledge. There was moderate evidence that the attributes of the 'sender' of an oral health promotion message influenced its effectiveness. Many barriers and facilitators were shown to influence the effectiveness of OHP in dental practice. The results of this review suggest that the psychology of behaviour change is the key to oral health promotion and greater emphasis on teaching oral health professionals about health psychology would make oral health promotion in the dental surgery more effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To assess the socioeconomic inequalities in oral hygiene and to explore the role of various socioeconomic and psychosocial factors as determinants of these inequalities among adolescents residing in Delhi National Capital Territory. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1386 adolescents aged 12-15 years from three different socioeconomic groups according to their area of residence (middle-class areas, resettlement colonies and urban slum colonies). Level of oral hygiene was examined clinically using the Simplified Oral Hygiene Index ( OHI-S), and an interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to measure key socio-demographic variables and psychosocial and health-related behaviours. Logistic regression analysis tested the association between area of residence and poor oral hygiene. Results Poor oral hygiene was observed in 50.2% of the adolescents. There was a socioeconomic gradient in poor oral hygiene, with higher prevalence observed at each level of deprivation. These differences were only partly explained, and the differences between adolescent groups remained statistically significant after adjusting for various demographic variables, standard of living, social capital, social support and health-affecting behaviours ( OR: 1.96, 95% CI: 1.30-2.76; and OR: 2.50, 95% CI: 1.60-3.92 for adolescents from resettlement colonies and urban slums, respectively, than middle-class adolescents). Conclusion Area of residence emerged as a strong socioeconomic predictor of prevalence of poor oral hygiene among Indian adolescents. Various material, psychosocial and behavioural factors did not fully explain the observed inequalities in poor oral hygiene among different adolescent groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To develop an assessment tool for evaluating oral health promotion practices and to evaluate community-based oral health promotion practices targeted at children and adolescents with this tool. Methods A theoretical framework about health promotion planning, implementation and evaluation was made on the basis of a literature review. Then, information about Finnish community-based oral health promotion practices ( n = 12) targeted at children and adolescents was collected using semi-structured interviews. Also, related documents, for example action plans and reports, were collected when available. Next, an assessment tool based on the theoretical framework was developed, and the recorded and transcribed interview data and other documents were evaluated with this tool. Results The assessment tool proved to be practical: it pointed out the strengths and weaknesses of the practices. The tool revealed strengths in the implementation and deficiencies in the planning and evaluation of oral health promotion practices. One-quarter of the 12 practices assessed could be considered 'good practices'. Conclusions There is a need to improve the planning and evaluation of oral health promotion practices. The assessment tool developed in this study might be useful for practitioners both in the field of oral health promotion and general health promotion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For over 30 years, the WHO has been advocating an integrated approach in chronic disease prevention. The concept of the common risk factor approach ( CRFA) highlighted shared risk factors for chronic conditions including oral diseases has provided the basis for closer integration of oral and general health promotion activities. Although considerable progress has been undoubtedly made in combating the isolation and compartmentalization of oral health, this paper will argue that future action on tackling oral health inequalities requires a reorientation of oral health policy away from a fixation on changing oral health behaviours to instead action on the common social determinants of oral health inequalities. The narrow and restricted interpretation of the CRFA is a serious threat to developing effective action to address oral health inequalities. Based upon the WHO conceptual framework on the social determinants of health inequalities, an overview will be presented of a range of actions that could be implemented to tackle the social gradients in oral health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Evaluation of the effectiveness of a school-based oral health promotion intervention on preadolescents’ gingival health. Methods: A community trial designed for a 3-month intervention study in a representative sample of 9-year-olds ( n = 457) in 16 schools in Tehran, Iran. The schools were randomly assigned to three intervention groups and one control group, each group comprising two boys’ and two girls’ schools. The first group of children ( n = 115) received intervention via class work, solving a set of puzzles containing oral health messages, under supervision of their health counsellor. The second group ( n = 114), intervention via parents, included an oral health education leaflet and a brushing diary for supervising the child’s tooth-brushing; the third group ( n = 111) received a combination of both these interventions. The control group ( n = 117) had no intervention. Effects of the intervention were assessed as changes in dental plaque and gingival bleeding. Improvements in gingival health were recorded when half of the index teeth with plaque at baseline became clean (acceptable oral hygiene) or when all index teeth with bleeding at baseline became healthy (healthy gingiva). Statistical analysis included chi square,anova, t-test, Number Needed to Treat (NNT) and generalized estimating equations (GEE). Results: At baseline, none of the children were free of plaque and all except for three boys had bleeding. After the trial, acceptable oral hygiene was more frequent in the parental-aid ( P < 0.001) and the combined groups ( P < 0.05), and healthy gingiva in both groups ( P < 0.001) in comparison with the control group. Outcomes in the class-work group did not differ from those in the control group. The GEE models confirmed a strong intervention effect on healthy gingiva in both groups where parents were involved: parental-aid group (OR = 7.7, 95% CI: 2.2–27.7) and combined group (OR = 6.6, 95% CI: 2.0–22.1). In all intervention groups more girls than boys achieved healthy gingiva (OR = 2.5–2.6). Parents’ education showed no impact on the outcome. Conclusions: When a school-based oral health intervention involves parents it may result in a significant improvement in the gingival health of preadolescents with poor gingival health at baseline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the outcome of oral health promotion in schoolchildren over a 3-year period in Yichang City, Hubei, China. Methods: In a cluster randomized controlled trial, the concept of the World Health Organization Health Promoting Schools Project was applied to primary schoolchildren. Seven intervention schools and eight control schools were randomly selected from one district by stratified cluster sampling. The study was conducted as a 3-year follow-up study. After 3 years, 661 children remained in the intervention group and 697 children in the control group. Data on dental caries, plaque accumulation, and sulcus bleeding were collected by clinical examination, while behavioural data were gathered by self-administered questionnaires. Results: The 3-year net mean DMFS increment score was 0.22 in the intervention schools and 0.35 in the control schools ( P < 0.013). A statistically significant difference in mean plaque ( P < 0.013) and sulcus bleeding ( P < 0.005) increment scores after 3 years was found between the two groups. Statistically significant higher scores were observed in restorations received and sealants placed, and a lower score in untreated dental caries, in children from the intervention group than the control group after 3 years ( P < 0.01). In addition, more children in the intervention schools adopted regular oral health behavioural practices such as brushing their teeth at least twice a day, visiting the dentist within the past calendar year, and using fluoride toothpaste. Conclusion: The study suggests that the school-based oral health promotion was an effective way to reduce new caries incidence, improve oral hygiene and establish positive oral health behavioural practices in the targeted schoolchildren. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oral health promotion effectiveness reviews have identified the need to improve the quality of the evaluation of interventions. A project was undertaken to identify and assess the quality of available outcome measures. This paper describes the methodology adopted and highlights the need for further development of oral health promotion outcome measures. Initially a thorough and comprehensive search of both the published and unpublished literature was undertaken to identify potential outcome measures. A set of quality criteria was then developed and used to assess the identified measures. The search identified a total of 1202 outcome measures of which 39% ( n = 466) were developed for use with schoolchildren. A high proportion of the identified measures were classified as health literacy and healthy lifestyle outcomes, appropriate for the evaluation of oral health education activities. Only 1% ( n = 12) of measures identified were classified in the healthy public policy category. When reviewed against the quality criteria, 49% ( n = 594) of the measures were considered satisfactory. The poorest performing measures were those classified as healthy lifestyle and health literacy measures in which only 33% ( n = 72) and 41% ( n = 240), respectively, were deemed to be of satisfactory quality. In conclusion, a significant number of oral health promotion evaluation outcome measures have been identified although their quality is highly variable. Very few high-quality outcome measures exist for use in the evaluation of oral health policy and environmental interventions. The lack of appropriate and high-quality outcome measures is hampering the development of oral health promotion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasing emphasis is now being placed upon the evaluation of health service interventions to demonstrate their effects. A series of effectiveness reviews of the oral health education and promotion literature has demonstrated that many of these interventions are poorly and inadequately evaluated. It is therefore difficult to determine the effectiveness of many interventions. Based upon developments from the field of health promotion research this paper explores options for improving the quality of oral health promotion evaluation. It is essential that the methods and measures used in the evaluation of oral health promotion are appropriate to the intervention. For many oral health promotion interventions clinical measures and methods of evaluation may not be appropriate. This paper outlines an evaluation framework which can be used to assess the range of effects of oral health promotion programmes. Improving the quality of oral health promotion evaluation is a shared responsibility between researchers and those involved in the provision of programmes. The provision of adequate resources and training are essential requirements for this to be successfully achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on two studies exploring similarities and contrasts in knowledge, attitudes and opinions on fluorides and fluoridation of two culturally different population groups. The first study compares the attitudes and opinions of parents of primary (elementary) schoolchildren in Melbourne, Australia, and Yokohama, Japan, and the second study compares the attitudes and opinions of dentists drawn from the same geographic areas. A self-administered questionnaire collected data on 517 parents and 629 dentists. The questionnaires were of similar design and content for both parents and dentists, They included a series of knowledge and attitudinal statements on preventive dentists and use of fluorides. Attitudinal responses were measured on a 5-point agree-disagree Likert scale. Data were analyzed using both bivariate and multivariate techniques. Australian parents appeared better informed on the benefits of water fluoridation and held mote favorable opinions on fluorides and fluoridation than then Japanese counterparts. Similarly, Australian dentists held more positive attitudes toward the use of fluorides and fluoridation than their Japanese peers. Cultural norms and experiences appear to shape parental attitudes, whereas the focus of dental education and dental practice on restorative treatments in Japan appears to be a substantial influence on the attitudes and opinions held by Japanese dentists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]