Fissure sealants or fluoride varnish? Routines and attitudes among dental health personnel in Norway

Purpose To investigate routines and attitudes among dentists and dental hygienists concerning use of fissure sealants and fluoride varnish for non-operative management of occlusal caries. Methods All dentists and dental hygienists working in child dental care in three counties in Norway were invited...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European archives of paediatric dentistry 2019-12, Vol.20 (6), p.577-583
Hauptverfasser: Uhlen, M.-M., Wang, N. J., Skudutyte-Rysstad, R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose To investigate routines and attitudes among dentists and dental hygienists concerning use of fissure sealants and fluoride varnish for non-operative management of occlusal caries. Methods All dentists and dental hygienists working in child dental care in three counties in Norway were invited to answer a questionnaire on routines for use of fissure sealants and fluoride varnish. Nine statements regarding attitudes towards use of sealants were scored using a five-point Likert scale. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess indicators associated with reported routines for use of sealants and varnish. The study was approved by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data. Results In total 142 of 189 (75%) dentists and dental hygienists answered the questionnaire. The majority of the respondents, n  = 83 (59%), reported to prefer fissure sealants while fluoride varnish was preferred by 57 (41%) of the respondents. Frequent use of fissure sealants was reported by 58 (41%) and frequent use of varnish by 104 (74%) of the respondents. Most ( n  = 104, 74%), used sealants on specific indications, and 89 (64%) opened fissures only when suspecting dentine caries. Preferred method and routines for occlusal caries management differed between counties ( p  
ISSN:1818-6300
1996-9805
DOI:10.1007/s40368-019-00440-w