Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics · 2005
Oral piercings among first-year university students.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Ventä Irja, Lakoma Ani, Haahtela Sauli, Peltola Jaakko, Ylipaavalniemi Pekka, Turtola Lauri
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine oral piercings among first-year university students.
STUDY DESIGN: First-year university students in 2002 were invited to a dental examination (n = 234; 49 men and 185 women). Students with piercings formed the study group and the rest served as controls. The methods included decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMF) index, stimulated salivary flow rates, panoramic tomograms, and questionnaires including the Depression Inventory of Beck. Fisher's 2-sided exact test was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The prevalence of oral piercings was 3.4%. In the DMF indices, no statistically significant differences existed between the groups. Increased salivary flow rates were noted among students with piercings (63% vs 26%, P < .05). Use of tobacco and illicit drugs, and also depression, were more prevalent in the study group than in the controls.
CONCLUSION: Because of the possibility of oral implications, follow-up of oral piercings is essential.
STUDY DESIGN: First-year university students in 2002 were invited to a dental examination (n = 234; 49 men and 185 women). Students with piercings formed the study group and the rest served as controls. The methods included decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMF) index, stimulated salivary flow rates, panoramic tomograms, and questionnaires including the Depression Inventory of Beck. Fisher's 2-sided exact test was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The prevalence of oral piercings was 3.4%. In the DMF indices, no statistically significant differences existed between the groups. Increased salivary flow rates were noted among students with piercings (63% vs 26%, P < .05). Use of tobacco and illicit drugs, and also depression, were more prevalent in the study group than in the controls.
CONCLUSION: Because of the possibility of oral implications, follow-up of oral piercings is essential.