Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Department of Biomedical and Applied Sciences, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Department of Public Health and Dental Informatics, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
J Dent. 2024 Nov;150:105377. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105377. Epub 2024 Sep 28.
This study investigated the prevalence of water filtration and purification system (WFPS) use among residents of central Indiana (USA) and determined the effects of WFPS on the concentrations of fluoride, calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium in tap water.
A census-based questionnaire collected data on demographics, water use, and water sources. Participants were also asked to provide water samples from their tap water or the WFPS they used. Water samples were analyzed using ion-specific electrodes (fluoride) and atomic absorption spectrometry (metals). Mineral concentration comparisons between water sources used nonparametric tests; questionnaire associations were testing using correlations, chi-square tests, and nonparametric tests.
One hundred and one participants completed the study, of which 71 % used some type of WFPS. Blacks were less likely to use WFPS than Asian or White participants (p = 0.045). Those with bachelor's degrees or higher were more likely to use WFPS (p = 0.003). The most used WFPS were pitcher filters (31 %), water softeners (21 %), reverse osmosis systems (11 %), faucet-mounted filters (4 %), and whole-house carbon filters (1 %). Reverse osmosis systems resulted in the lowest mineral concentrations (median, ppm; F-0.08, Ca-2.30, Mg-0.46, Na-4.60, P-0.35). Pitcher filters were largely comparable to unfiltered tap water. Water softeners resulted in the highest sodium concentrations (78.40 ppm).
A large proportion of study participants use WFPS, with pitcher filters being the most common. Reverse osmosis systems had the most significant impact on reducing mineral levels in tap water, while pitcher filters do not adversely affect mineral concentrations.
Understanding how different WFPS affect the various minerals in tap water is essential for helping consumers in choosing the right system and for oral care providers to guide patients on water consumption and the need for fluoride supplementation, especially for those at high risk of dental caries.
本研究调查了美国印第安纳州中心地区（美国）居民使用水过滤和净化系统（WFPS）的情况，并确定 WFPS 对自来水中氟化物、钙、镁、钾和钠浓度的影响。
基于人口普查的问卷收集了人口统计学、用水和水源的数据。参与者还被要求提供来自他们的自来水或他们使用的 WFPS 的水样。使用离子选择性电极（氟化物）和原子吸收光谱法（金属）分析水样。使用非参数检验比较水源之间的矿物质浓度；使用相关性、卡方检验和非参数检验测试问卷关联。
101 名参与者完成了这项研究，其中 71%的人使用了某种类型的 WFPS。与亚洲或白人参与者相比，黑人使用 WFPS 的可能性较小（p=0.045）。拥有学士或更高学位的人更有可能使用 WFPS（p=0.003）。最常用的 WFPS 是水壶过滤器（31%）、水软化器（21%）、反渗透系统（11%）、水龙头安装过滤器（4%）和全屋碳过滤器（1%）。反渗透系统导致矿物质浓度最低（中位数，ppm；F-0.08，Ca-2.30，Mg-0.46，Na-4.60，P-0.35）。水壶过滤器与未经过滤的自来水基本相当。水软化器导致最高的钠浓度（78.40ppm）。
很大一部分研究参与者使用 WFPS，其中水壶过滤器最常见。反渗透系统对降低自来水的矿物质水平影响最大，而水壶过滤器不会对矿物质浓度产生不利影响。
了解不同的 WFPS 如何影响自来水中的各种矿物质，对于帮助消费者选择正确的系统以及为口腔护理提供者指导患者关于水的消耗和氟化物补充的需求至关重要，特别是对于那些有高患龋齿风险的患者。
