European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026
Cleft team strategy and caries experience in patients with a cleft lip and/or palate, a multicentre study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
van der Knaap-Kind L S, Carbajal Rodriguez Gisselle, Schorer-Jensma M A, Wolvius E B, Kragt L, van der Kaaij N C W
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Most cleft teams in The Netherlands have a paediatric dentist as a permanent team member, but differences persist in patients receiving general or specialised dental care in-between team visits. The current study aims to find out if different strategies regarding dental care result in different caries experience and restorative care levels of cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) patients.
METHODS: The cleft team of the Amsterdam University Medical Center, presented as Team Spec, refers all CL/P patients at age one to specialised dental care. The majority of CL/P patients treated in the Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, receive dental care from a general dentist, Team Gen. Data on decayed teeth (dt), missing teeth (mt), filled teeth (ft), sum dmft and restorative care level for the primary dentition of CL/P patients were compared with independent t-tests. Negative binomial hurdle regression and generalised linear models were used to correct for age, gender and cleft type. No comparison of the costs of both strategies was made.
RESULTS: The restorative care level of Team Spec (51.50%) was significantly better than Team Gen (29.31%) (p < 0.001). Though sum dmft of both teams was comparable (p = 0.32), patients in Team Spec had fewer missing teeth due to caries (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Receiving specialised dental care is beneficial for the restorative care level of CL/P patients.
METHODS: The cleft team of the Amsterdam University Medical Center, presented as Team Spec, refers all CL/P patients at age one to specialised dental care. The majority of CL/P patients treated in the Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, receive dental care from a general dentist, Team Gen. Data on decayed teeth (dt), missing teeth (mt), filled teeth (ft), sum dmft and restorative care level for the primary dentition of CL/P patients were compared with independent t-tests. Negative binomial hurdle regression and generalised linear models were used to correct for age, gender and cleft type. No comparison of the costs of both strategies was made.
RESULTS: The restorative care level of Team Spec (51.50%) was significantly better than Team Gen (29.31%) (p < 0.001). Though sum dmft of both teams was comparable (p = 0.32), patients in Team Spec had fewer missing teeth due to caries (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Receiving specialised dental care is beneficial for the restorative care level of CL/P patients.