Premium
Prevalence and predictive factors of dentin hypersensitivity in Brazilian adolescents
Author(s) -
Silva Markelane Santana,
Lima Alessandra Noleto de Almeida Nunes,
Pereira Marta Maria Alves,
Ferraz Mendes Regina,
Prado Júnior Raimundo Rosendo
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/jcpe.13097
Subject(s) - medicine , dentin hypersensitivity , gingival recession , dentistry , lesion , toothbrush , dentin , brush , surgery , electrical engineering , engineering
Abstract Aim To measure the prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity ( DH ) in adolescents. Methods The diagnosis was based on self‐report and was confirmed by tactile and evaporative tests. The association between DH and predictor factors was determined using a multivariate model. The sample consisted of 384 adolescents. Results The prevalence was 19.0%. DH prevalence to tactile stimulus was higher in those participants whose toothbrush movement was vertical/horizontal ( OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.47–0.60, p < 0.001), in the presence of dental biofilm ( OR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.94–3.09, p < 0.001), of non‐carious cervical lesion ( OR = 2.76, 95% CI = 2.40–3.18, p < 0.001), of gingival recession ( OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.44–1.86, p < 0.001) and gyroversion ( OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.40–1.82; p < 0.001). When DH was diagnosed by evaporative stimulus, there was an association with brush movement in a vertical/horizontal direction ( OR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.66–0.82, p < 0.001), with the use of mouthwash solutions ( OR = 2.65, 95% CI = 2.16–3.25, p < 0.001), in the presence of non‐carious cervical lesion ( OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.57–1.96, p < 0.001), of gyroversion ( OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.51–1.90, p < 0.001) and gingival recession ( OR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.59–1.99, p < 0.001). Conclusions The prevalence of DH in the sample was worrying, since almost 1 in 5 adolescents had DH . Individuals with DH were more likely to report traumatic dental brushing, and presence of dental biofilm, non‐carious cervical lesion, gingival recession and gyroversion in the affected teeth.