Australian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH), Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Menzies Health Institute Queensland and School of Dentistry and Oral Health, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.
J Dent Res. 2019 Oct;98(11):1211-1218. doi: 10.1177/0022034519866628. Epub 2019 Aug 3.
The aim of this article was to quantify socioeconomic inequalities in dental caries experience among Australian children and to identify factors that explain area-level socioeconomic inequalities in children's dental caries. We used data from the National Child Oral Health Survey conducted in Australia between 2012 and 2014 ( = 24,664). Absolute and relative indices of socioeconomic inequalities in the dental caries experience in primary and permanent dentition (decayed, missing, and filled surfaces [dmfs] and DMFS, respectively) were estimated. In the first stage, we conducted multilevel negative binomial regressions to test the association between area-level Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage (IRSAD) and dental caries experience (dmfs for 5- to 8-y-olds and DMFS for 9- to 14-y-olds) after adjustment for water fluoridation status, sociodemographics, oral health behaviors, pattern of dental visits, and sugar consumption. In the second stage, we performed Blinder-Oaxaca and Neumark decomposition analyses to identify factors that explain most of the area-level socioeconomic inequalities in dental caries. Children had a mean dmfs of 3.14 and a mean DMFS of 0.98 surfaces. Children living in the most disadvantaged and intermediately disadvantaged areas had 1.96 (95% confidence interval, 1.69-2.27) and 1.45 (1.26-1.68) times higher mean dmfs and 1.53 (1.36-1.72) and 1.43 (1.27-1.60) times higher mean DMFS than those living in the most advantaged areas, respectively. Water fluoridation status (33.6%), sugar consumption (22.1%), parental educational level (14.2%), and dental visit patterns (12.7%) were the main factors explaining area-level socioeconomic inequalities in dental caries in permanent dentition. Among all the factors considered, the factors that contributed most in explaining inequalities in primary dental caries were dental visits (30.3%), sugar consumption (20.7%), household income (20.0%), and water fluoridation status (15.9%). The inverse area-level socioeconomic inequality in dental caries was mainly explained by modifiable risk factors, such as lack of fluoridated water, high sugar consumption, and an unfavorable pattern of dental visits.
本文旨在量化澳大利亚儿童在龋齿经历方面的社会经济不平等,并确定解释儿童龋齿社会经济不平等的因素。我们使用了 2012 年至 2014 年期间在澳大利亚进行的国家儿童口腔健康调查的数据(n=24664)。我们估计了乳牙和恒牙列龋齿经历(dmfs 分别代表龋失补牙面和 DMFS)的绝对和相对社会经济不平等指数。在第一阶段,我们进行了多水平负二项回归分析,以检验区县级相对社会经济优势和劣势指数(IRSAD)与龋齿经历(5-8 岁儿童的 dmfs 和 9-14 岁儿童的 DMFS)之间的关联,调整了水氟化物状况、社会人口统计学、口腔健康行为、就诊模式和糖消费。在第二阶段,我们进行了 Blinder-Oaxaca 和 Neumark 分解分析,以确定解释龋齿社会经济不平等的主要因素。儿童的平均 dmfs 为 3.14,平均 DMFS 为 0.98 个面。生活在最不利和中等不利地区的儿童的平均 dmfs 分别高出 1.96(95%置信区间,1.69-2.27)和 1.45(1.26-1.68)倍,平均 DMFS 分别高出 1.53(1.36-1.72)和 1.43(1.27-1.60)倍,分别高于生活在最有利地区的儿童。水氟化物状况(33.6%)、糖消费(22.1%)、父母教育水平(14.2%)和就诊模式(12.7%)是解释恒牙列龋齿社会经济不平等的主要因素。在所考虑的所有因素中,对解释乳牙龋齿不平等贡献最大的因素是就诊(30.3%)、糖消费(20.7%)、家庭收入(20.0%)和水氟化物状况(15.9%)。龋齿的逆区县级社会经济不平等主要由可改变的危险因素解释,如缺乏氟化水、高糖消费和不利的就诊模式。