Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

BDS3 PMHP > Community Based F delivery > Flashcards

Community Based F delivery Flashcards

1
Q

effect of F dentally

A

systemic Vs topical effect

Original belief
- Beneficial effect of F- was its systemic pre-eruptive effect (strengthening enamel during tooth development)

BUT

Dental caries
dynamic process of demineralisation and remineralisation
- Therefore – constant supply of fluoride in oral cavity is most important factor to inhibit demineralisation and encourage reminerlisation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

now recognised as primary mode of action of F

A

in reducing dental caries = post-eruptive

i.e. topical effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

vehicles for F delivery (7)

A

water

salt

milk

varnishes/gels

rinses

supplements i.e. drops/tablets

toothpaste

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Fluoridated salt

A

First introduced - Switzerland (1955)
- Subsequently used in France, Colombia, Spain & Hungary + others (1960’s onwards)

Switzerland
(90mgF/kg) -> 25% caries reduction after 12 yrs
Hungary
(250-350 mgF/kg) -> 53-68% caries reduction after 10 yrs use

Previously considered most important community F- delivery system, other than water F-
- 2nd to water-F- as means of ensuring ingestion of F-

Caries-preventive effect comparable to that of water fluoridation
- Requires little conscious action by the individual
0 Provides element of choice/ but public health effectiveness diminished

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

disadvantages of F salt community strategy

A

In communities with small levels of water F- need for varying levels of F- in salt
- (? Logistics – manufacturers + distributors)

Mixed messages from health professionals
- risk of cardiovascular disease

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

F milk

A

Some public health programmes carried out (Mainly school-children)

Glasgow : 1976-1981 (1.5mg in 200ml)
- 48% diff. Mean DMFS between cases and controls

N.W. England: 1997-2001 (0.5mg in 189ml)
- No caries reduction in primary dentition (children aged 3-5 yrs) and only small reduction in permanent dentition up to 8 yrs of age (not clinically significant)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

potential factors influencing results of Fluoridated Milk schemes (6)

A

Age at commencement

Population

F- concentration

Frequency of use

Distribution system

Compliance/drop out rate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

advantages of F milk (3)

A

Natural healthy drink for children

Important part of child’s diet – rich in nutrients

Enables fluoride to be targeted to those who would benefit most

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

disadvantages of F milk

A

Distribution delayed until nursery/school age

Not all children drink milk

Distribution system/shelf life/cost issues (higher than water F-)
? lack of long term benefit

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

APF gels

A

acidulated phosphate fluoride gels

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

APF gels application

A

Professionally applied (or self-applied under supervision)

operator-applied fluoride gels use trays and self-applied gels use either a tray or a toothbrush

Time consuming to apply (approx. 30 mins) – up to x2 / year

Special equipment necessary, i.e. custom-made trays

High cost per tooth surface saved (£11)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

APF gels F concentration

A

12,300 ppm

Fluoride gels must be differentiated from some fluoride toothpastes,

The ‘classical’ fluoride gels do not contain abrasives, their fluoride concentration is usually much higher than that of a fluoride toothpaste, and they are applied at relatively infrequent intervals

Acute toxicity risk
- if ingested - causes sickness (not uncommon = not recommended for young children)

probable toxic dose (PTD) of 100 mg of fluoride for a 20 kg (5-6 year-old) child is contained in only 8 ml volumes of these gels.
- Approximately 5 ml of gel is used in a topical application of APF gel in a tray
representing a potential exposure of 61.5 mg of fluoride ion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

F mouth rinses

A

Early studies (1960’s-1970’s)  effectiveness in caries reduction.

Since caries decline (1970’s), doubts about marginal benefit + cost effectiveness

Reasonable to use F- mouthrinsing in high-caries-risk populations. Benefit doubtful in low-risk groups

Not recommended for <7 yr. olds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

F supplements (tablets/drops)

A

In use since 1940’s

Originally used :
birth to 6 yrs (previous belief in importance of systemic effect).

Later :
Proven post-eruptive topical cariostatic benefits in school-aged children > 5.5 yrs old

Systemic effect much less important than topical effect
therefore appropriate to advise continuation beyond 6yrs old for at-risk children (with additional needs / special care requirements)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

F supplement dosage in Area with water F- <0.3 ppm fluoride

A 
Age		mg F- per day
0 - 6 months		0
6 months - 3 yrs	0.25
3 yrs - 6 yrs		0.50
6 yrs and over	1.00
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

F supplements advice now

A

Agreed now :
Pop. level - Tends to be poor compliance

not suitable as public health measure (Best results in school-based programmes)

  • Should be directed towards “at-risk” children only
  • Careful assessment of risks and benefits for children <7yrs old, i.e. risk of fluorosis
17
Q

F varnish

A

designed to hold F- in close contact with tooth for a period of time

Proven efficacy in caries prevention via systematic reviews
(Marinho : dmfs PF = 33% in primary teeth)

PF = Incidence in Exposed – Incidence in Unexposed.

18
Q

F varnish evidence

A

Cochrane Review 1 (Marinho et al. 2002)
- F Varnish effective for preventing decay – in patients and communities
But, more research needed

Cochrane Review 2 (Hiiri et al. 2010)

  • F Varnish vs Fissure sealants
  • Ltd evidence

Cochrane Review 3 (Marinho et al 2013)

  • substantial caries inhibiting effect of FV in both permanent and primary teeth.
  • quality of evidence moderate

SDCEP guidance on managing and preventing dental caries in children

19
Q

F varnish application

A

professionally applied

Need to be reapplied at regular intervals

Emerging consensus re. optimum application frequency (2-4/year depending on caries risk)
- ? Cost-effectiveness

Major component of Childsmile

20
Q

F toothpaste

A

Most widely used fluoride delivery vehicle in the world

500m of world’s pop. use F- toothpaste

Considered as single most important factor in caries decline

  • Caries decline - late 70’s/early 80’s
  • Sale of F- toothpaste - <5% in 1970 to >95% in 1977.
21
Q

Fluoride toothpaste/brushing factors (4)

A

(A) Concentration (amount) of fluoride

(B) Frequency of brushing

(C) Age at commencement of brushing

(D) Post-brushing rinsing

[age, specific guidance – children / adults]

22
Q

Concentration of F in toothpaste

A

Evidence of dose-response relationship re. caries-preventive effect

Findings : Each additional 500ppmF- over & above 1000ppmF = a cumulative 6% reduction in caries increment.

Evidence from Systematic Reviews -

  • Cochrane Review (2001) : - 8% increase in DMFS prevented fraction per 1000ppmF-
  • Swedish Review (2003): - Mean diff. in DMFS prevented fraction between 1500ppm & 1000ppm of 9.7%

PF = DMFS Incidence in Exposed - Unexposed

Limited evidence for caries-preventive effect of toothpaste with = 550ppmF-

Colgate children’s toothpaste + Macleans Milk Teeth

  • traditionally 500ppmF-.
  • more recently 1000ppmF-

Controversy re. F- dose for young children
- tendency to swallow toothpaste so risk of fluorosis
BUT - Loss of caries-preventive efficacy with 500ppmF- and lower
- Balance risk of fluorosis with benefit in caries reduction

Current evidence (no water F-) :
- 1500ppmF- toothpaste & limit to pea-sized amount or smear
23
Q

amount of F toothpaste on dry toothbrush

A

smear 0-2 (half brush length smear)

pea size 2+

24
Q

frequency of brushing with F toothpaste

A

Good evidence from Systematic Reviews
= Morinho et al (2010) Cochrane Review
that effect of F- toothpaste inc with higher freq. of use
(i.e. 14% increase in DMFS ‘prevented fraction’ with twice-daily brushing as opposed to once daily).

Current advice = brush at least twice daily

  • Pre-school children using 1500ppmF-
  • Regulate quantity of toothpaste to smear or pea-sized amount
  • Parental help/supervision to avoid swallowing
25
Q

age at commencing brushing with F tootpaste

A

Agreed that toothbrushing should commence as soon as primary teeth erupt
- Approx. 6 months – could have a baby used to toothbrush in mouth prior and then introduce F toothpaste

Evidence :
“among children with visible plaque evident at visual examination at one year of age, 29% developed carious lesions by two years of age and 54% by three years of age”. (Wendt, 1994)

26
Q

post brushing rinsing

A

Current advice for parents/children:

  • Spit out excess toothpaste
  • Refrain from rinsing with water post-brushing

Main evidence :
A) Swedish RCT : dec rinsing water + not eating for 2 hours post-brushing decreased amt.+ rate of fluoride removal from the mouth.
B) Scottish RCT : Caries increment using beaker = 6.84 vs. 5.84 without beaker (p<0.05)

27
Q

Toothpaste adverse effects

A

Dental fluorosis risk - only upper anterior and canines (enamel formed in first 3 years of life)

Sig risk reduction start brushing after 12 mths

No sig risk depending on brushing freq.

F conc. >1000ppm marginally sig risk
- But ltd evidence

Precautionary advice – risk caries higher than risk fluorosis

28
Q

policy developments in scotland

A

childsmile, oral health plan

29
Q

england policy developments

A

oral health toolkit from Public Health England

30
Q

main recommendations sources

A

SIGN Guidelines : http://www.sign.ac.uk/guidelines/fulltext/138/

SDCEP guidance http://www.sdcep.org.uk/published-guidance/caries-in-children/

31
Q

Childsmile core

A

Toothbrushing Programme

Oral health pack given to children in 1st year of life, at age 3 (2 packs), 4 (2 packs) and 5 (1 pack)

All nursery schools (local authority and private) invited to participate in daily supervised brushing programme

All primary schools in most deprived local SIMD quintile invited to participate in daily supervised brushing programme (P1 & P2)

32
Q

integrated childsmile programme

A

childsmile core

childsmile practice

childsmile nursery and school

33
Q

childsmile practice

A

Principal Objectives:

  • Raising parental awareness of good oral health behaviours and supporting parents to put them into practice
  • Increasing the provision of oral health promotion and clinical prevention within dental primary care
  • Every newborn routinely linked to CS via Health Visitor/ PHN

Oral health advice & clinical prevention via Primary Care Dental Services (team approach involving EDDNs)

Families requiring additional support to receive enhanced home/ community visiting via DHSW

Link families to community health improvement activity

34
Q

childsmile nursery and school

A

Targeted to priority nurseries and primary schools (SIMD-based)

Programme of 6 monthly F varnish applications throughout nursery and primary school (via EDDNs)

Fissure sealants: (pilot NHS Fife)

Follow-up of children who are not regular GDS/CDS attenders

35
Q

childsmile approach - 2 types

A

population

targeted

36
Q

population childsmile approach

A

Core programme e.g. dental packs, nursery toothbrushing

Tailored programme of care within Primary Care Dental Services

37
Q

targeted childsmile approach

A

Additional home/community support via DHSW

Enhanced programme of care within Primary Care Dental Services

Additional clinical preventive programmes targeting 20% highest need nursery and primary schools

Supervised toothbrushing P1 and P2 targeting 20% highest need primary schools (extended in some areas)

BDS3 PMHP (14 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions