The relationship between water fluoridation and socioeconomic deprivation on tooth decay in 5-year-old children

Effects of Water Fluoridation on Caries Experience in the Primary Dentition in a High Caries Risk Community in Queensland, Australia

Objectives: In December 2008, artificial water fluoridation was introduced for the first time to the Logan-Beaudesert district in the state of Queensland, Australia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of water fluoridation in the primary dentition in this community after a period of 36 months. Methods: Children aged 4-9 years with clinical examinations and bitewing radiographs (BWs) taken before water fluoridation (pre-F) were randomly selected as comparison controls for age matched children who had been exposed to a mean period of 36 months of water fluoridation (post-F). A total of 201 sets of pre-F BWs from children (mean age 6.95 ± 1.05 years) and 256 sets of post-F BWs from children (mean age 7.19 ± 1.23 years) attending schools in the district were randomly selected. Caries experience in the primary dentition was determined as decayed, missing or filled teeth/surfaces (dmft/dmfs). Results: The caries prevalence for the pre-F group was 87% compared to 75% in the post-F group (Odds ratio (OR): 0.44, 95% CI: 0.27-0.72). Overall, there was a 19 percent reduction of mean dmft from 4.54 in the pre-F group to 3.66 in the post-F group (p = 0.005). After fluoridation, the dmfs was reduced from 6.68 to 5.17 (p = 0.0056). The distal surfaces of maxillary first primary molars experienced the greatest reduction (26%) in caries experience after water fluoridation (p < 0.001). Conclusions: After only 36 months of water fluoridation there was a significant drop in caries prevalence from 87 to 75% and a 19% reduction in caries experience in a community with one of the highest caries rates in Australia.

Theoretical explanations for social inequalities in oral health

Social inequalities in health and oral health continue to present a major challenge to public health. Progress towards the development of interventions to reduce health inequalities is currently being hampered by an incomplete understanding of the causes of inequalities in health. This paper aims to provide oral health researchers with an overview of four current explanations for inequalities in oral health and to suggest further areas of research needed to advance our understanding of the causes of social inequalities in oral health.

Concepts of risk in dental public health

The purpose of this paper is to review the concepts of risk as we use them today in dental public health practice, and to suggest that we should broaden our view of risk. Use of terms like risk factor in the literature can be quite vague, and it is recommended that a clear definition of that and related terms be adhered to. A broader view of risk in dental research would take in the concepts of social determinants of health and population health. While some progress has been made in our understanding of these issues, better knowledge would give the public health administrator more readily available information to use in program planning. The skewed distribution of caries in the high-income countries has led to the emergence of targeted prevention programs toward those considered to be at high risk. In public health programs, targeting at the individual level is not practical: the risk assessment methods are not yet sufficiently precise, and even when individuals are identified there are practical problems with schools and with the children themselves. (For private practice, however, high-risk child patients can be identified as those with at least one approximal lesion in permanent teeth.) For public health purposes, an argument is made for geographic targeting, i.e. identification of areas of social deprivation where whole schools or school districts can be targeted. Geographic targeting is something between individual targeting and whole-population approaches. Ideally, geographic targeting would supplement population measures like water fluoridation and dental health education. Examples of geographic targeting from Ohio and New York are presented as illustrations.