Journal of public health dentistry · 2004
Enamel fluorosis prevalence after a 7-year interruption in water fluoridation in Jaú, São Paulo, Brazil.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Buzalaf Marília A R, de Almeida Beatriz S, Olympio Kelly P K, da S Cardoso Vanessa E, de C S Peres Sílvia H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This paper analyzes the impact of a 7-year interruption in water fluoridation on the prevalence of enamel fluorosis in Jaú, state of São Paulo, Brazil.
METHODS: Fluorosis prevalence (TF index) was evaluated in permanent maxillary central incisors of children (9-14 years old) that were 36 (n=81; cohort -36), 27 (n=81; cohort -27), and 18 months old (+/-1 month; n=89; cohort -18) in October 1991, when the breakstarted, and 18months old(+/-1 month;n=70; cohort 18) after that date. Children brushed their teeth prior to examination, which was conducted under natural light by three calibrated examiners (agreement 87.8-93.8%, kappa 0.72-0.85).
RESULTS: The fluorosis prevalence (TF> or =1) was 7.41 percent, 3.70 percent, 7.87 percent, and 18.57 percent, respectively, for cohorts -36, -27, -18, and 18. The difference between cohort 18 and the other groups was statistically significant (Kruskall-Wallis test, P=.05).
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the fluoridated water is not an important risk factor for enamel fluorosis, since the prevalence of enamel fluorosis was low in the cohorts -36, -27, and -18 when fluoridated water was used.
METHODS: Fluorosis prevalence (TF index) was evaluated in permanent maxillary central incisors of children (9-14 years old) that were 36 (n=81; cohort -36), 27 (n=81; cohort -27), and 18 months old (+/-1 month; n=89; cohort -18) in October 1991, when the breakstarted, and 18months old(+/-1 month;n=70; cohort 18) after that date. Children brushed their teeth prior to examination, which was conducted under natural light by three calibrated examiners (agreement 87.8-93.8%, kappa 0.72-0.85).
RESULTS: The fluorosis prevalence (TF> or =1) was 7.41 percent, 3.70 percent, 7.87 percent, and 18.57 percent, respectively, for cohorts -36, -27, -18, and 18. The difference between cohort 18 and the other groups was statistically significant (Kruskall-Wallis test, P=.05).
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the fluoridated water is not an important risk factor for enamel fluorosis, since the prevalence of enamel fluorosis was low in the cohorts -36, -27, and -18 when fluoridated water was used.