Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The UBC Children’s Dental Program (CDP) has provided free dental treatments to underserved low-income children, but its preventive component needs to be enhanced. The study aims were: 1) to develop a “waiting-room based” dental education program engaging caregivers of these children, and 2) to assess the program’s feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness.
METHODS: In preparation, a situational analysis (SA) included structured interviews with caregivers, and with various stakeholders (e.g., dental students, instructors, health authority) involved in the CDP program. Based on the SA, caregiver-centered education was designed using an interactive power point presentation; after the presentation, each caregiver set personalized goals for modifying his/her child’s dental behaviours. Evaluation of the program was done with follow-up telephone calls; the program’s effectiveness was assessed by comparing before/after proportions of caregivers brushing their child’s teeth, children brushing teeth in the morning and evening, children eating sugar-containing snacks, and children drinking sugar-containing drinks.
RESULTS: The program proved to be easy to implement (feasible) and the recruitment rate was 99% (acceptable). The follow-up rate was 81%. The SA identified that the caregivers’ knowledge about caries etiology and prevention was limited. All recruited caregivers completed the educational session and set goals for their family. The evaluation demonstrated an increase in caregiver-reported short-term diet and oral self-care behaviours of their children.
CONCLUSION: A dental education program engaging caregivers in the waiting room was a feasible, acceptable and promising strategy for improving short¬term dental behaviours of children.
Key Words: Dental education, children, parents, primary prevention
Résumé
OBJECTIFS: Le programme de soins dentaires de l’UBC (CDP) a offert des traitements dentaires sans frais aux enfants à faible statut socioéconomique, mais la composante de prévention a besoin d’amélioration. L’étude visait à: 1) élaborer une séance de formation en soins dentaires de type « salle d’attente » qui engageaient les parents de ces enfants et 2) évaluer la faisabilité, l’acceptabilité et l’efficacité du programme.
MÉTHODES: Au départ, une analyse de la situation (AS) comprenait des entrevues structurées avec les parents ainsi qu’avec divers intervenants (p.ex., des étudiants en dentisterie, des instructeurs, des autorités sanitaires) impliqués dans le programme CDP. Selon l’AS, des cours visant les parents ont été élaborés en utilisant une présentation interactive PowerPoint; après la présentation, chacun des parents s’est fixé des buts personnalisés dans le but de modifier le comportement des enfants quant aux soins dentaires. L’évaluation du programme s’est effectuée au moyen de suivis téléphoniques; l’efficacité du programme a été évaluée en comparant la proportion de responsables qui brossaient les dents des enfants, des enfants qui se brossaient les dents le matin et en soirée, des enfants qui consommaient des collations contenant du sucre, et des enfants qui consommaient des breuvages contenant du sucre, selon un démarquage avant/après.
RÉSULTATS: Le programme s’est avéré facile à mettre en œuvre (faisabilité) et le taux de recrutement était acceptable à 99 %. Le taux de suivi était de 81 %. L’AS a pu identifier que la connaissance des parents au sujet de l’étiologie de la carie et de la prévention était limitée. Tous les parents ont terminé la séance de formation et ont pu fixer des objectifs pour la famille. L’évaluation a fait la preuve d’une amélioration de comportements par rapport à un régime à court terme ainsi que du comportement autonome des enfants en santé orale.
CONCLUSION: Un programme d’éducation qui engage les parents dans la salle d’attente est un moyen faisable, acceptable et une stratégie prometteuse pour l’amélioration des habitudes de la santé orale des enfants.
Mots Clés: hygiène dentaire, enfants, parents, prévention primaire
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
References
- 1.Federal, Provincial and Territorial Dental Working Group. Summary Report on the Findings of the Oral Health Component of the Canadian Health Measures Survey 2007–2009. Government of Canada Publications.
- 2.Canadian Institute for Health Information CIHI. Treatment of Preventable Dental Cavities in Preschoolers: A Focus on Day Surgery Under General Anesthesia. Ottawa, ON: CIHI; 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Selwitz RH, Ismail AI, Pitts NB. Dental caries. Lancet. 2007;369(9555):51–59. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60031-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Do LG, Scott JA, Thomson WM, Stamm JW, Rugg-Gunn AJ, Levy SM, et al. Common risk factor approach to address socioeconomic inequality in the oral health of preschool children - A prospective cohort study. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:429. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.dela Cruz GG, Rozier RG, Slade G. Dental screening and referral of young children by pediatric primary care providers. Pediatrics. 2004;114(5):e642–52. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Milgrom P, Chi DL. Prevention-centered caries management strategies during critical periods in early childhood. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2011;39(10):735–41. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Nowak AJ. Paradigm shift: Infant oral health care - Primary prevention. J Dent. 2011;39(Suppl2):S49–55. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.11.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Mattila ML, Rautava P, Silanpaa M, Paunio P. Caries in five-year-old children and associations with family-related factors. J Dent Res. 2000;79(3):875–81. doi: 10.1177/00220345000790031501. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Marmot M, Bell R. Social determinants and dental health. Adv Dent Res. 2011;23(2):201–6. doi: 10.1177/0022034511402079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Wagner Y, Heinrich-Weltzien R. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(8):1943–52. doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1685-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Finnegan DA, Rainchuso L, Jenkins S, Kierce E, Rothman A. Immigrant caregivers of young children: Oral health beliefs, attitudes, and early childhood caries knowledge. J Community Health. 2016;41(2):250–57. doi: 10.1007/s10900-015-0090-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Meurman PK, Pienihakkinen K. Factors associated with caries increment: A longitudinal study from 18 months to 5 years of age. Caries Res. 2010;44(6):519–24. doi: 10.1159/000320717. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Holst A, Braune K, Kjellberg M. Changes in caries experience among 6-year-olds in Blekinge, Sweden between 1994 and 2000. Swed Dent J. 2004;28(3):129–35. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Twetman S. Prevention of early childhood caries (ECC) - Review of literature published 1998–2007. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2008;9(1):12–18. doi: 10.1007/BF03321590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Paglia L, Scaglioni S, Torchia V, De Cosmi V, Moretti M, Marzo G, et al. Familial and dietary risk factors in Early Childhood Caries. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2016;17(2):93–99. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Maher L, Phelan C, Lawrence G, Torvaldsen S, Dawson A, Wright C. The Early Childhood Oral Health Program: Promoting prevention and timely intervention of early childhood caries in NSW through shared care. Health Promot J Austr. 2012;23(3):171–76. doi: 10.1071/HE12171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Begzati A, Bytyci A, Meqa K, Latifi-Xhemajli B, Berisha M. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2014;12(2):133–40. doi: 10.3290/j.ohpd.a31667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Crosby R, Noar SM. What is a planning model? An introduction to PRECEDE-PROCEED. J Public Health Dent. 2011;71(Suppl1):S7–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2011.00235.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Kawamura M, Komabayashi T, Sasahara H, Okada M, Taguchi N, Ogawa T. PRECEDE-PROCEED model modification in community-based oral health promotion by using the linear structural relations programme. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2010;8(4):315–21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Watson MR, Horowitz AM, Garcia I, Canto MT. J Public Health Dent. 2001;61(1):34–41. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2001.tb03353.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Rowan-Legg A. Oral health care for children - A call for action. Paediatr Child Health. 2013;18(1):37–43. doi: 10.1093/pch/18.1.37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Watt RG. From victim blaming to upstream action: Tackling the social determinants of oral health inequalities. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007;35:1–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00348.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.The Canadian Collaboration for ImmigrantRefugee Health. Oral health included in new guidelines for physicians treating newly arriving immigrants and refugees. J Can Dent Assoc. 2011;77:b109. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Watt RG, Sheiham A. Integrating the common risk factor approach into a social determinants framework. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012;40(4):289–96. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2012.00680.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Watt RG, Heilmann A, Listl S, Peres MA. London Charter on Oral Health Inequalities. J Dent Res. 2016;95(3):245–47. doi: 10.1177/0022034515622198. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Dolce MC. Integrating oral health into professional nursing practice: An interprofessional faculty tool kit. JProfNurs. 2014;30:63–71. doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2013.06.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Skeie MS, Skaret E, Espelid I, Misvær N. Do public health nurses in Norway promote information on oral health? BMC Oral Health 2011;11:. PMID: 21923940. doi: 10.1186/1472-6831-11-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 28.Shimpi N, Schroeder D, Kilsdonk J, Chyou P, Glurich I, Penniman E, Acharya A. Medical providers’ oral health knowledgeability, attitudes, and practice behaviors: An opportunity for interprofessional collaboration. JEvid Base Dent Pract. 2016;16(1):19–29. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2016.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Ramos-Gomez FJ, Silva DR, Law CS, Pizzitola RL, John B, Crall JJ. Creating a new generation of pediatric dentists: A paradigm shift in training. J Dent Educ. 2014;78(12):1593–603. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]