Research
Figure 1: Percentage of participants reporting dental anxiety 30
25 20 15 10 5 0
Treatment tomorrow
Waiting room
Teeth drilled
Scale and polish
anaesthetic injection
Continued »
to be clinically satisfactory. Of the ı2 participants who wore dentures at the time of the survey, one third (four) was aged between 35-44 years of age.
Dental attendance, experiences and attitudes Dental registration and attendance Twenty-three per cent of the Lanarkshire sample reported that they were registered with a dentist, 58 per cent reported that they were not registered, and ı9 per cent did not provide a response. Thirty- eight per cent of participants stated that they had visited the dentist within the last ı2 months, and a further ı6 per cent had last attended one to two years ago. Of the 88 participants who
reported the reason for their last visit, the majority (6ı per cent)
stated that they had attended the dentist because of trouble with their teeth. Only 37 per cent had attended for a routine dental examination or check-up.
Dental treatment experiences The most commonly reported treatment experiences were injec- tion in the gum (84 per cent) and fillings (8ı per cent). Seventy per cent of the sample had experienced extractions. Table ı shows the reported treatment experiences of the Lanarkshire sample compared to the Scotland-wide sample (see table ı on p47).
Opinions about dental visits and treatment Attitudes to dental visits and treatment are outlined in table 2 (below).
Psychosocial health Dental anxiety and phobia
Table 2: Opinions about dental visits and accessing treatment All Male Female 70% 70% 69%
Would like to drop in without an appointment
Would rather take painkillers than go to the dentist
Would like to know more about what the dentist is going to do and why Worst part is waiting for treatment Don’t want intricate treatment NHS dental treatment hard to find
Going to the dentist is like being on a conveyer belt
Don’t like lying flat in the dental chair
Dental receptionists not very helpful or welcoming
60% 55% 73% 53% 51% 58%
40% 46% 61% 50% 53% 42% 48% 50% 38%
35% 30% 50% 33% 30% 42%
27% 24% 38% REFERENCES
1 Humphris GM, Morrison T, Lindsay SJ. The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms. Community Dent Health 1995; 12: 143-150. 2 Slade GD. Depriva- tion and validation of a short-form oral health impact profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1997; 25: 284-290. 3 Walker A, Cooper I, editors. Adult
Local
Slightly anxious
Fairly
anxious Very
anxious
Extremely anxious
AWARD
A written submission of this survey won the Keith Woods Memorial Prize in 2011. The prize, organised by the British Associa- tion for the Study of Community Dentistry (BASCD), is awarded to BASCD members who produce a written submission of original research work or good practice in oral health needs assessment or dental epidemiology. It is only bestowed on those who manage to compile a piece of work which is regarded as of appropriate high quality.
Dental anxiety was measured by the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS)ı. Possible scores range from five to 25; a score of ı9 or over indicates dental phobia. Figure ı shows the propor-
tions of the Lanarkshire sample who stated that they experienced dental anxiety. Larger proportions of participants reported that they were extremely anxious about having their teeth drilled (24 per cent) and having a local anaesthetic (2ı per cent). The least feared item was a scale and polish, with only 9 per cent stating they were extremely anxious. Twenty per cent of the 98
participants who completed the MDAS scored ı9 or over, suggesting that one-fifth of the Lanarkshire sample could be categorised as dentally phobic. The mean score for dental
anxiety was ıı.54. The mean dental anxiety score for women (ı3.60) was higher than for men (ı0.83).
Dental Health Survey: Oral Health in the United Kingdom 1998. London: The Stationery Office; 2000. 4 Radloff LS. The CES-D Scale: A self- report depression scale for research in the general popula- tion. Appl Psychol Meas 1977; 1: 385-401.
Oral health-related quality of life This was assessed using the Oral Health Impact Scale (OHIP-ı4)2, which measures the frequency of commonly experienced impacts of oral ill health. Scores for indi- vidual items range from zero (never) to four (very often). The overall mean total impact score across all ı4 items was ı.24. Table 3 shows that the oral health of the Lanarkshire sample impacted on their psychological functioning with regard to psychological
Continued » Scottish Dental magazine 49
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92