English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The urban low income has often been assumed to have the greatest dental treatment needs compared to the general population. However, no studies have been carried out to verify these assumptions. This study was conducted to assess whether there was any difference between the treatment needs of an urban poor population as compared to the general population in order to design an intervention programme for this community.    Methods  A random sampling of living quarters (households) in the selected areas was done. 586 adults over 19 years old living in these households were clinically examined using World Health Organization (WHO) Oral Health Survey criteria 4th edition (1997).    Results  The overall prevalence of dental caries, periodontal disease, denture wearers and temporomandibular joint problems were 70.5%, 97.1%, 16.7% and 26%, respectively. The majority (80.5%) needed some form of dental treatment. The highest treatment needs were found in the oldest age group while the lowest were in the youngest group (19-29 years) (p = 0.000). The most prevalent periodontal problem was calculus; regardless of gender, ethnicity and age. Significantly more females (20.5%) wore prosthesis than males (11.1%) (p = 0.003). Prosthetic status and need significantly increased with age (p = 0.000). About one in four adults had Temporo-Mandibular Joint (TMJ) problems. Overall, it was surprising to note that the oral disease burden related to caries, prosthetic status and treatment need were lower in this population as compared to the national average (NOHSA, 2010). However, their periodontal disease status and treatment needs were higher compared to the national average indicating a poor oral hygiene standard.    Conclusions  The evidence does not show that the overall oral disease burden and treatment needs in this urban disadvantaged adult population as higher than the national average, except for periodontal disease. The older age groups and elderly were identified as the most in need for oral health intervention and promotion. An integrated health intervention programme through a multisectoral common risk factor approach in collaboration with the Faculties of Medicine, Dentistry and other agencies is needed for the identified target group.

Is the burden of oral diseases higher in urban disadvantaged community compared to the national prevalence?