Age and gender related tooth loss and partial edentulism among the adulthoods

Abstract

Aim: Despite the improvements in preventive measures and restorative techniques in dentistry, tooth loss still remains as a significant problem. The determination of the edentulism prevelance may provide a new perspective for the patient-oriented treatment alternatives. The aim of the study was to evaluate the influence of gender and age on the prevelance of tooth loss.

Material and Methods: The data were gathered from the randomly selected 722 diagnostic models obtained from the patients consulting to the Ankara University, Faculty of Dentistry, between 2015 and 2016. Models were evaluated under 6 groups as followings; full dentition, Kennedy Class I-IV and total edentulism. Each model was classified according to the gender and age. Statistical analysis were performed by using Chi-Square test and log-linear model analysis and odds ratios also calculated (p˂0.05).

Results: Gender has no effect on the edentulism whereas age significantly affects the number of tooth loss and the prevelance of edentulism. The loss prevelance of teeth 34, 36 and 37 was higher in females, while the tooth 24 loss was more common in male patients (p≤0.05).

Conclusion: The number of tooth loss and edentulism significantly increase with the age. However, there was no relation between gender and prevelance of tooth loss and edentulism. prevention measures for oral health should be increased in elderly people.

Keywords

• tooth loss,partial edentulism,age,gender

Yetişkin bireylerde yaş ve cinsiyet ile ilişkili diş kaybi ve parsiyel dişsizlik

Abstract

Amaç: Koruyucu önlemler ve restoratif tekniklerdeki gelişmelere rağmen, diş kaybı günümüzde hala önemli bir sorun olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Bir toplumdaki dişsizlik oranının belirlenmesi hastalara özgü tedavi alternatiflerinin ortaya konulmasında yeni bir bakış açısı sağlayabilir. Bu bakımdan, çalışmamızda cinsiyet ve yaş faktörlerinin diş kaybı ve dişsizlik üzerine etkisini değerlendirmek amaçlanmıştır.

Gereç ve Yöntemler: Ankara Üniversitesi, Dişhekimliği Fakültesi, Protetik Diş Tedavisi Anabilim Dalı’ na 2015-2016 yılları arasında dişsizlik tedavisi için başvuran hastalardan (188 kadın, 173 erkek hasta; yaş aralığı 28-79) 722 adet maksiller ve mandibular teşhis modeli elde edilmiştir. Tüm modeler tam dişli, Kennedy Sınıf I-IV ve tam dişsiz olmak üzere 6 grup altında incelenmiştir. Her bir model hastanın yaş ve cinsiyetine göre sınıflandırılmıştır. Ki-kare testi ve log-lineer model analizi ile istatistiksel değerlendirmeler yapılmıştır (p˂0,05). Ayrıca odds oranları da hesaplanmıştır.

Bulgular: Yaş, diş kaybı ve dişsizlik üzerinde etkili bir faktör olarak bulunurken (p<0,05), cinsiyet ile diş kaybı ve dişsizlik arasında önemli bir ilişki bulunmamıştır.(p>0,05).
Cinsiyet esas alındığında, 34, 36 ve 37 numaralı dişlerin kaybı bayanlarda daha yaygın görülürken (p<0,05), 24 numaralı diş kayıp oranı erkeklerde daha yüksek tespit edilmiştir (p<0,05).

Sonuç: Yaş ile birlikte diş kaybı ve dişsizlik önemli oranda artması ancak cinsiyet ile diş kaybı ve dişsizlik arasında önemli bir ilişki bulunmaması, ağız sağlığını koruyucu önlemlerin ileri yaşlardaki bireylerde arttırılması gereğini ortaya koymuştur.

Keywords

• diş kaybı,parsiyel dişsizlik,yaş,cinsiyet

References

1. 1. Doğan BG, Gökalp S Tooth loss and edentulism in Turkish elderly. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2012; 54: 162-66.
2. 2. Bourgeois D, Nihtila A, Mersel A Prevelance of caries and edentulousness among 65-74-years-olds in Europe. Bull. World Health Organ 1998; 76: 413-17
3. 3. Petersen P, E Yamato T Improving the oral health of older people: the approach of the WHO Global Oral Health Program. Community Dent. Oral Epidemol 2005; 3381-92
4. 4. Steele JG, Treasure E, Pitts NB, Morris C, Bradnock G Total tooth loss in the United kingdom in 1998 and implications fort he future. Br Dent J 2000; 189: 598-603.
5. 5. Skinner CN Classification of removable partial dentures of based upon the principlesod f anatomy and physiology. J Prost Dent 1958; 9: 240-46.
6. 6. Applegate OC The rationale of partial denture choice. J Prosthet Dent 1960; 10: 891-907
7. 7. Cummer WE Possible combinations of teeth present and missing in partial dentures. Oral Health 1920; 10: 421-26
8. 8. Hugo FN, Hilgert JB, de Sousa MLR, da Silva DD, Pucca Jr GA Coreelates of partial tooth loss and edentulism in the Brazillian elderly. Community Dent. Oral Epidemol 2007; 35: 224-32.

9. 9. Kida IA, Astrom AN, Strand GV, Masalu JR Clinical and socio-behavioral Correlates of tooth loss: a study of older adults in Tanzania. BMC Oral Health 2006; 6-5
10. 10. Fure S, Zickert I Prevelance of tooth loss and dental caries in 60, 70 and 80-year-old Swedish individuals. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1997; 25: 137-42.
11. 11. Islas-Granillo H1, Borges-Yañez SA, Lucas-Rincón SE, Medina-Solís CE, Casanova-Rosado AJ, Márquez-Corona ML, Maupomé G Edentulism risk indicators among Mexican elders 60-year-old and older. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2011; 53: 258-62.
12. 12. Marcus SE, Drury TF, Brown LI, Zion GR Tooth retention and tooth loss in the permanent detention of adults: United States, 1988-1991. J Dent Res 1996; 75: 684-95.
13. 13. AL-Dwairi ZN Partial edentulism and removable denture construction: a frequency study in Jordanians. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2006; 14: 13-17.
14. 14. Sadig WM, Idowu AT Removable partial denture design: A study of a selected population in Saudi Arabia. J Contemp Dent Pract 2002; 3: 40-53.
15. 15. Keyf FFrequency of the various classes of removable partial denture and selection of major connector and direct/indirect retainer. Turk J Med Sci 2001; 31: 445-49.
16. 16. Görgün S, Özperk G, Yzıcıoğlu B A survey of the reasons for the extractions of permanent teeth. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 1995; 2: 15-18.
17. 17. Bocutoğlu Ö, Dayı E, Çelenk P, Yılmaz B Diş çekim nedenleri üzerine bir araştırma. Atatürk Üniv. Diş Hek Fak Derg 1994; 4: 59-66.
18. 18. Wong MC, McMllan AS Tooth loss, denture wearing and oral health-related quality of life in elderly Chinese people. Comuunity Dent Health 2005; 22: 91-97
19. 19. Yamazaki M, Inukai M, Baba K, John MT Japanese version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-J). J Oral Rehabil 2007; 34: 159-68.
20. 20. Soe KK, Gelbier S, Robinson PG Reliability and validity of two oral health related quality of life measures in Myanmar adolescents. Community Dent Health 2004; 21: 306-11.
21. 21. Enoki K, Ikebr K, Hazeyama T Prevelance of partial denture and selection of major connector and direct/indirect retainer. Turk J Med Sci 2001; 31: 445-49.
22. 22. Sadig WM, Idowu AT Removable partial denture design: A study of a selected population in Saudi Arabia. J Contemp Dent Pract 2002; 3: 40-53.
23. 23. Charyeva OO, Altynbekov KD, Nysanova BZ Kennedy Classification and Treatment Options: A Study of Partially Edentulous Patients Being Treated in a Specialized Prosthetic Clinic. J Prosthodont 2012; 21: 177– 80.
24. 24. Ergün G, Çekiç I Evaluation of removable partial denture patients who applied to university of Gazi, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry. GU Dişhek Fak Derg 2005; 22: 175-80
25. 25. Polychronakis N, Sottiriou M, Zissis A A survey of removable partial denture casts and major connector designs found in commercial laboratories. J Prosthodont 2013; 22: 245-49.
26. 26. Curtis DA, Curtis TA, Wagnild GW Prevelance of various classes of removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67: 664–67.
27. 27. Ulusoy M, Pamir AD Bölümlü protez kliniğine başvuran hastalarda dişsizliğin dağılımı. A.ü. Diş Hek Fak Derg 1997; 4: 1.
28. 28. Güldağ UM Investigation of the Distrubition of the Removable Partial Denture Patients In Relation Partial to Age Groups. E.Ü Diş Hek Fak Derg 1989; 10: 107-14.
29. 29. Güzel KH, Niğiz R, Eskimez Ş, Yazanel T, Zenginül A The Distribution Of Edentulism Of 119 Partial Edentulous Patients According to Kennedy Classification. Atatürk Ü. Diş Hek Derg 1996; 6: 9-14.