The prevalence of dental fluorosis in relation to water or salt fluoridation and reported use of fluoride toothpaste in school-age children

Topical fluoride as a cause of dental fluorosis in children

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review first published in 2010. Use of topical fluoride has become more common over time. Excessive fluoride consumption from topical fluorides in young children could potentially lead to dental fluorosis in permanent teeth.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the relationship between the use of topical fluorides in young children and the risk of developing dental fluorosis in permanent teeth.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out electronic searches of the Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers. We searched the reference lists of relevant articles. The latest search date was 28 July 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cohort studies, case-control studies, and cross-sectional surveys comparing fluoride toothpaste, mouth rinses, gels, foams, paint-on solutions, and varnishes to a different fluoride therapy, placebo, or no intervention. Upon the introduction of topical fluorides, the target population was children under six years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome measure was the percentage prevalence of fluorosis in the permanent teeth. Two authors extracted data from all included studies. In cases where both adjusted and unadjusted risk ratios or odds ratios were reported, we used the adjusted value in the meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 43 studies: three RCTs, four cohort studies, 10 case-control studies, and 26 cross-sectional surveys. We judged all three RCTs, one cohort study, one case-control study, and six cross-sectional studies to have some concerns for risk of bias. We judged all other observational studies to be at high risk of bias. We grouped the studies into five comparisons. Comparison 1. Age at which children started toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste Two cohort studies (260 children) provided very uncertain evidence regarding the association between children starting to use fluoride toothpaste for brushing at or before 12 months versus after 12 months and the development of fluorosis (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.18; very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, evidence from one cohort study (3939 children) and two cross-sectional studies (1484 children) provided very uncertain evidence regarding the association between children starting to use fluoride toothpaste for brushing before or after the age of 24 months (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.13; very low-certainty evidence) or before or after four years (odds ratio (OR) 1.60, 95% CI 0.77 to 3.35; very low-certainty evidence), respectively. Comparison 2. Frequency of toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste Two case-control studies (258 children) provided very uncertain evidence regarding the association between children brushing less than twice per day versus twice or more per day and the development of fluorosis (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.28; very low-certainty evidence). Two cross-sectional surveys (1693 children) demonstrated that brushing less than once per day versus once or more per day may be associated with a decrease in the development of fluorosis in children (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.74; low-certainty evidence). Comparison 3. Amount of fluoride toothpaste used for toothbrushing Two case-control studies (258 children) provided very uncertain evidence regarding the association between children using less than half a brush of toothpaste, versus half or more of the brush, and the development of fluorosis (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.46; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence from cross-sectional surveys was also very uncertain (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.28; 3 studies, 2037 children; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison 4. Fluoride concentration in toothpaste There was evidence from two RCTs (1968 children) that lower fluoride concentration in the toothpaste used by children under six years of age likely reduces the risk of developing fluorosis: 550 parts per million (ppm) fluoride versus 1000 ppm (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.99; moderate-certainty evidence); 440 ppm fluoride versus 1450 ppm (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.89; moderate-certainty evidence). The age at which the toothbrushing commenced was 24 months and 12 months, respectively. Two case-control studies (258 children) provided very uncertain evidence regarding the association between fluoride concentrations under 1000 ppm, versus concentrations of 1000 ppm or above, and the development of fluorosis (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.52; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison 5. Age at which topical fluoride varnish was applied There was evidence from one RCT (123 children) that there may be little to no difference between a fluoride varnish application before four years, versus no application, and the development of fluorosis (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.31; low-certainty evidence). There was low-certainty evidence from two cross-sectional surveys (982 children) that the application of topical fluoride varnish before four years of age may be associated with the development of fluorosis in children (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.25).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most evidence identified mild fluorosis as a potential adverse outcome of using topical fluoride at an early age. There is low- to very low-certainty and inconclusive evidence on the risk of having fluorosis in permanent teeth for: when a child starts receiving topical fluoride varnish application; toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste; the amount of toothpaste used by the child; and the frequency of toothbrushing. Moderate-certainty evidence from RCTs showed that children who brushed with 1000 ppm or more fluoride toothpaste from one to two years of age until five to six years of age probably had an increased chance of developing dental fluorosis in permanent teeth. It is unethical to propose new RCTs to assess the development of dental fluorosis. However, future RCTs focusing on dental caries prevention could record children's exposure to topical fluoride sources in early life and evaluate the dental fluorosis in their permanent teeth as a long-term outcome. In the absence of these studies and methods, further research in this area will come from observational studies. Attention needs to be given to the choice of study design, bearing in mind that prospective controlled studies will be less susceptible to bias than retrospective and uncontrolled studies.

A comparison of dental fluorosis in adult populations with and without lifetime exposure to water fluoridation

OBJECTIVES

There is a lack of evidence on the proportion and severity of fluorosis in adult populations exposed and not exposed to fluoridated water over their lifetimes. The aim of this study was to compare the proportion and severity of fluorosis in adults with lifetime exposure to water fluoridation with a nonexposed sample. A secondary aim was to report the gradient of fluorosis severity by age.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study recruited a sample with lifetime exposure to water fluoridation and a matched, nonexposed group. 580 participants, aged 18-52 years (mean 34.3, SD 9.4) and 64% female, were recruited in general dental practices located in fluoridated (Birmingham and County Durham) and nonfluoridated areas (Manchester). Three digital images were taken of their incisors and an experienced examiner who was blind to exposure status viewed the images remotely and allocated fluorosis scores using the Thylstrup and Fejerskov (TF) scale.

RESULTS

At TF ≥ 1 (any fluorosis), a significantly higher proportion of participants from the fluoridated area had fluorosis (F 39% NF 21.3%, P < 0.001), at the threshold TF ≥ 3 ("aesthetic concern"), the difference was no longer statistically significant (F 4.1%, NF 2.2%, P = 0.25). There was a gradient by age, whereby fluorosis was highest in the youngest and lowest in the oldest age group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although fluorosis is more common in adults with lifetime exposure to water fluoridation than those with no exposure, the aesthetic impact of fluorosis seems to diminish with age.

Topical fluoride as a cause of dental fluorosis in children

BACKGROUND

For many years, topical use of fluorides has gained greater popularity than systemic use of fluorides. A possible adverse effect associated with the use of topical fluoride is the development of dental fluorosis due to the ingestion of excessive fluoride by young children with developing teeth.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the relationship between the use of topical fluorides in young children and the risk of developing dental fluorosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic search of the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, Dissertation Abstracts and LILACS/BBO. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched. Date of the most recent searches: 9th March 09.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional surveys, in which fluoride toothpastes, mouthrinses, gels, foams, paint-on solutions, and varnishes were compared to an alternative fluoride treatment, placebo or no intervention group. Children under the age of 6 years at the time topical fluorides were used.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data from all included studies were extracted by two review authors. Risk ratios for controlled, prospective studies and odds ratios for case-control studies or cross-sectional surveys were extracted or calculated. Where both adjusted and unadjusted risk ratios or odds ratios were presented, the adjusted value was included in the meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

25 studies were included: 2 RCTs, 1 cohort study, 6 case-control studies and 16 cross-sectional surveys. Only one RCT was judged to be at low risk of bias. The other RCT and all observational studies were judged to be at moderate to high risk of bias. Studies were included in four intervention/exposure comparisons. A statistically significant reduction in fluorosis was found if brushing of a child's teeth with fluoride toothpaste commenced after the age of 12 months odds ratio 0.70 (random-effects: 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.88) (data from observational studies). Inconsistent statistically significant associations were found between starting using fluoride toothpaste/toothbrushing before or after the age of 24 months and fluorosis (data from observational studies). From the RCTs, use of higher level of fluoride was associated with an increased risk of fluorosis. No significant association between the frequency of toothbrushing or the amount of fluoride toothpaste used and fluorosis was found.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There should be a balanced consideration between the benefits of topical fluorides in caries prevention and the risk of the development of fluorosis. Most of the available evidence focuses on mild fluorosis. There is weak unreliable evidence that starting the use of fluoride toothpaste in children under 12 months of age may be associated with an increased risk of fluorosis. The evidence for its use between the age of 12 and 24 months is equivocal. If the risk of fluorosis is of concern, the fluoride level of toothpaste for young children (under 6 years of age) is recommended to be lower than 1000 parts per million (ppm).More evidence with low risk of bias is needed. Future trials assessing the effectiveness of different types of topical fluorides (including toothpastes, gels, varnishes and mouthrinses) or different concentrations or both should ensure that they include an adequate follow-up period in order to collect data on potential fluorosis. As it is unethical to propose RCTs to assess fluorosis itself, it is acknowledged that further observational studies will be undertaken in this area. However, attention needs to be given to the choice of study design, bearing in mind that prospective, controlled studies will be less susceptible to bias than retrospective and/or uncontrolled studies.

Dental fluorosis prevalence and severity using Dean's index based on six teeth and on 28 teeth

To contrast the sensitivity, specificity, and positive-negative predictive values between dental fluorosis prevalence scored on 28 (DF28) and on six permanent teeth (DF6), we undertook a cross-sectional study on 1,538 adolescents (12 and 15 years old) residing in Hidalgo State, Mexico, a naturally fluoridated (>0.7 ppm) area at an elevated altitude (>2,500 m above sea level). Dental fluorosis was scored using Deans modified index. Using the scores obtained for all teeth present (DF28) as a gold standard, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive-negative predictive values, and receiver operating characteristic and concordance index pertaining to the scores based on six teeth (upper incisors and canines). DF28 fluorosis prevalence was 81.7%; based on DF6, it was 58.7% (23% difference). Among 12 year olds, the difference between DF28 and DF6 was 20.1% (84.5 vs. 64.4%); among 15 year olds, it was 25.4% (79.4 vs. 54%). Among girls, it was 23.2% (81.1 vs. 57.9%) and among boys, 22.8% (82.2 vs. 59.4%). The fluorosis community indices were 1.75 (DF28) and 1.11 (DF6). All positive predictive values reached 100% while negative predictive values were below 45%. Concordance between DF28 and DF6 was 53.9%, and kappa coefficient was 0.40. Partial scoring of fluorosis based on esthetically important permanent teeth underestimated prevalence, compared to full-mouth scoring. The decision to use an abridged Dean's index protocol must take into account the number of teeth examined, and which specific teeth are examined, to appraise the benefit of reduced data collection effort against possible information loss.