Australian Research Centre for Population Oral Health, School of Dentistry, The University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Aust Dent J. 2012 Dec;57(4):477-85. doi: 10.1111/adj.12000. Epub 2012 Oct 14.
Why oral health status outside capital cities is poorer than that in capital cities has not been satisfactorily explained. The aim of this study was to determine if the reason was poorer access to dental care.
Data were obtained from the Australian National Survey of Adult Oral Health (2004-06). Oral health status was measured by DMFT Index, and numbers of decayed, missing and filled teeth. A two-step analysis was undertaken: comparing the dependent variables by location, socio-demographic confounders and preventive dental behaviours, and then including six access to dental care variables.
Of the 14 123 people interviewed, 5505 were examined, and 4170 completed the questionnaire. With socio-economic parameters in the first regression model, non-capital city people had higher DMFT (regression coefficient = 1.15, p < 0.01), more decayed (0.42, p < 0.01) and missing teeth (0.85, p < 0.01), but not filled teeth (-0.11, p = 0.71), than capital city based people. In the second step analysis, non-capital city people still had a greater DMFT (1.01, p < 0.01), more decayed (0.27, p = 0.03) and missing teeth (0.74, p < 0.01), but not filled teeth (0.00, p = 0.99) than capital city based people.
Access to dental care was not the only reason why people outside capital cities have poorer oral health than people living in capital cities.
为什么城市以外地区的口腔健康状况比省会城市差，这个问题尚未得到满意的解释。本研究旨在确定原因是否是由于获得牙科保健的机会较差。
本研究的数据来自澳大利亚全国成人口腔健康调查（2004-06 年）。口腔健康状况通过 DMFT 指数和龋齿、缺失和填补的牙齿数量来衡量。采用两步分析法：首先比较地理位置、社会人口统计学混杂因素和预防牙科行为对因变量的影响，然后纳入六个与获得牙科保健相关的变量。
在接受采访的 14123 人中，有 5505 人接受了检查，其中 4170 人完成了问卷调查。在第一个回归模型中考虑了社会经济参数后，非省会城市的人 DMFT 更高（回归系数=1.15，p<0.01），龋齿更多（0.42，p<0.01），缺牙更多（0.85，p<0.01），但补牙较少（-0.11，p=0.71）。在第二步分析中，非省会城市的人 DMFT 仍然更高（1.01，p<0.01），龋齿更多（0.27，p=0.03），缺牙更多（0.74，p<0.01），但补牙较少（0.00，p=0.99）。
获得牙科保健并不是城市以外地区的人口口腔健康状况比省会城市差的唯一原因。
