Tooth loss is a complex measure of oral disease: Determinants and methodological considerations.
Tooth loss is a complex measure of oral disease: Determinants and methodological considerations.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/cdoe.12391
复制
发表时间：
2018-12
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Johansson I
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Haworth S;Shungin D;Kwak SY;Kim HY;West NX;Thomas SJ;Franks PW;Timpson NJ;Shin MJ;Johansson I
在大规模人群研究中，缺失牙齿的计数或偶发牙齿缺失的测量作为测量牙齿状况的简单方法正在受到关注。我们探讨这些指标的意义，以及缺牙如何影响牙齿状况的其他指标。在2个对照成人人群中进行了一项观察性研究。总共有62522名成年参与者可从基因-生活方式相互作用和牙科终点研究（GLIDE）的瑞典分支和韩国国家健康和营养检查调查（KNHANES）中获得临床评估的龋齿和牙周指数。GLIDE中28244名参与者的牙齿脱落纵向测量结果可用，中位随访时间为10.6年。在纵向分析中，牙齿脱落的风险与基线牙齿状况（既往牙齿脱落、牙周状况和龋齿状况）和社会人口学变量（年龄、吸烟状况和最高教育水平）相关。横断面数据分析表明，龋齿暴露指数与牙周状况无关。关联的强度和方向在各组之间存在差异，即使是专门用于避免测量牙齿脱落的措施。牙周健康受损者（社区牙周指数[CPI] 3或更高的任何六分仪）有较高的标准化腐烂和填充表面GLIDE中的（DFS; DFS数量除以齿面总数）（发病风险比[IRR] 1.05 [95%CI：1.04，1.07]，但KNHANES组的标准化DFS（IRR：0.95 [0.92，0.98]）低于牙周健康状况较好的个体（所有六分点CPI <3）。偶发性牙齿脱落是一个复杂的衡量牙科疾病的指标，有多个决定因素。龋齿和牙周病作为牙齿脱落驱动因素的相对重要性在不同年龄组之间存在差异。在研究人群中，龋齿暴露的测量与牙周状况相关，并且这些关联可能具有人群特异性。可能需要考虑这些指标的研究特定属性，以便在大人群研究中进行有效推断。
Counts of missing teeth or measures of incident tooth loss are gaining attention as a simple way to measure dental status in large population studies. We explore the meaning of these metrics and how missing teeth might influence other measures of dental status. An observational study was performed in 2 contrasting adult populations. In total, 62 522 adult participants were available with clinically assessed caries and periodontal indices from the Swedish arm of the Gene‐Lifestyle Interactions and Dental Endpoints Study (GLIDE) and the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) in the Republic of Korea. Longitudinal measures of tooth loss were available for 28 244 participants in GLIDE with median follow‐up of 10.6 years. In longitudinal analysis, hazard for tooth loss was associated with baseline dental status (previous tooth loss, periodontal status and caries status) and socio‐demographic variables (age, smoking status and highest educational level). Analysis of cross‐sectional data suggested that indices of caries exposure were not independent of periodontal status. The strength and direction of association varied between groups, even for measures specifically intended to avoid measuring tooth loss. Individuals with impaired periodontal health (community periodontal index [CPI] 3 or higher in any sextant) had higher standardized decayed and filled surfaces (DFS; number of DFS divided by total number of tooth surfaces) in GLIDE (incidence risk ratio [IRR] 1.05 [95% CI: 1.04, 1.07], but lower standardized DFS in KNHANES (IRR: 0.95 [0.92, 0.98]) than individuals with better periodontal health (CPI <3 in all sextants). Incident tooth loss is a complex measure of dental disease, with multiple determinants. The relative importance of dental caries and periodontal disease as drivers of tooth loss differs between age groups. Measures of dental caries exposure are associated with periodontal status in the studied populations, and these associations can be population‐specific. Consideration of the study‐specific properties of these metrics may be required for valid inference in large population studies.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Leroy R;Eaton KA;Savage A
通讯作者：
Savage A
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
KAY, EJ;BLINKHORN, AS
通讯作者：
BLINKHORN, AS
影响因子：
6.7
作者：
Padbury, A;Eber, R;Wang, HL
通讯作者：
Wang, HL
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
McCaul, LK;Jenkins, WMM;Kay, EJ
通讯作者：
Kay, EJ
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Aida, Jun;Ando, Yuichi;Morita, Manabu
通讯作者：
Morita, Manabu