van Palenstein Helderman Wim, Lo Edward, Holmgren Christopher
WHO Collaborating Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Int Dent J. 2003 Feb;53(1):19-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2003.tb00651.x.
Recently, it has been proposed that in planning oral health care services in non-established market economy (non-EME) countries, and for under- served communities throughout the world, high priority be given to a basic package of oral care (BPOC). This package contains three key components: emergency care (oral urgent treatment--OUT), exposure to appropriate fluoride (affordable fluoride toothpaste--AFT) and appropriate treatment technology (atraumatic restorative treatment--ART). These three components are embedded in the supporting context of oral health promotion (OHP). There is a lack of experience in implementing BPOC and besides, there is not much known about the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the proposed components of BPOC, either individually or as a package, under local conditions. An effective approach in one setting may not be successful in another setting due to many factors such as a lack of acceptability by the community or local government or because of insufficient financial and human resources. It is therefore recommended to consider small scale demonstration projects for effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability assessments of the various components of BPOC before embarking on large scale programmes. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the different aspects related to the planning, implementation and evaluation of oral health demonstration projects for under-served communities.
最近有人提出，在非市场经济国家规划口腔保健服务时，以及在为世界各地服务不足的社区提供服务时，应高度重视基本口腔保健包（BPOC）。这个保健包包含三个关键要素：急诊护理（口腔紧急治疗——OUT）、接触适量氟化物（平价含氟牙膏——AFT）和适当的治疗技术（非创伤性修复治疗——ART）。这三个要素融入了口腔健康促进（OHP）的支持性背景中。在实施基本口腔保健包方面缺乏经验，此外，对于基本口腔保健包所提议的各个要素在当地条件下单独或作为一个整体的有效性、效率和可持续性，人们了解得并不多。由于许多因素，如社区或地方政府缺乏接受度，或由于财政和人力资源不足，一种在某一环境中有效的方法在另一环境中可能并不成功。因此，建议在开展大规模项目之前，考虑进行小规模示范项目，以评估基本口腔保健包各个要素的有效性、效率和可持续性。本文的目的是突出与服务不足社区口腔健康示范项目的规划、实施和评估相关的不同方面。
