What children say and clinicians hear: accounts relating to incisor hypomineralisation of cosmetic concern.

AIM

To explore the range of impacts relating to incisor opacities as described by children, their general dental practitioners and paediatric dentists.

METHODS

Participants included 50 children, aged 7-16 years, referred to a UK hospital paediatric dentistry service for management of incisor opacities. All children were subsequently diagnosed with molar incisor hypomineralisation. Following ethical approval, data were recorded as follows: patient demographics, distance travelled, waiting times, nature of any impacts relating to incisor opacities documented in referral letters and/or in subsequent paediatric dentistry assessment records. Additionally, children completed the short form Child Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire (COHIP-SF19) as a self-report measure of their oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL).

RESULTS

Nearly, half (48%, n = 24) of the referral letters mentioned that the child was experiencing one or more negative social and/or functional impacts. Mean COHIP score was significantly lower (indicating poorer OHRQoL) for children whose referring dentist had identified a negative impact (COHIP = 42.9) compared to those with no documented impact (COHIP = 50.5; p = 0.018, independent t test). At the hospital consultation, negative impacts were elicited by a paediatric dentist in 86% (n = 43) of cases. Again, mean COHIP score was significantly lower for children whose assessment records noted a negative impact (COHIP = 44.5) compared to those with no recorded impact (COHIP = 60.2; p = 0.001). Families travelled a mean distance of 57 km (range 3-218 km) to the hospital service, with an average waiting time of 75 days from referral.

CONCLUSION

It is encouraging that dental professionals seem to be aware of the negative psychosocial impacts experienced by some children with enamel opacities, and that children feel able to describe them.