Article
Cover
RJDS Journal Cover Page

RGUHS Nat. J. Pub. Heal. Sci Vol No: 16 Issue No: 3   pISSN: 

Article Submission Guidelines

Dear Authors,
We invite you to watch this comprehensive video guide on the process of submitting your article online. This video will provide you with step-by-step instructions to ensure a smooth and successful submission.
Thank you for your attention and cooperation.

Original Article

Smitha Sharan* , Brunda K, Pradeep Chandra K, Sreeharsha T V, Kruthi M S

Department of Prosthodontics, Dayananda Sagar College of Dental Sciences, Bengaluru.

*Corresponding author:

Dr. Smitha Sharan, #203, 28th Cross, Jayanagar, 7th Block, Bengaluru-560082. E-mail: smithasharan@gmail.com

Received date: July 14, 2021; Accepted date: February 4, 2022; Published date: June 30, 2022

Year: 2022, Volume: 14, Issue: 2, Page no. 46-53, DOI: 10.26715/rjds.14_2_9
Views: 1371, Downloads: 60
Licensing Information:
CC BY NC 4.0 ICON
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0.
Abstract

Background: The prosthodontic health status and prosthodontic rehabilitation of Bengaluru city’s local population are not well documented. As prosthodontists, it is important to know how much concerned the people are towards oral health and what is their attitude, how aware are they about various available treatments and how much knowledge do they have about its importance in order to give them oral health education, create awareness and help develop the practice guidelines. Hence, the aim of the survey was to assess the knowledge, awareness and attitude of the general population in Bengaluru city towards prosthodontic rehabilitation.

Material and Methods: We divided Bengaluru city (total area of about 286 sq. miles) arbitrarily into four zones, namely, North zone, South zone, East zone and West zone. A total of 2516 subjects belonging to the age group of 35 to 74 years from all the four zones were surveyed with a questionnaire which was either in English or in Kannada (local language) with sixteen closed-ended questions. The statistical analysis of the data collected through the questionnaire was done using SPSS (V-22) software.

Results: The age of the subjects who participated in the survey ranged between thirty-five to seventy-four years. Among the 2516 subjects, 1283 were male subjects and 1233 were female subjects. It was found that most of the subjects (77.2%) visited the oral health care provider only when they had any dental problems. About 54.4% of the subjects who participated in the survey had not got their missing teeth replaced. About 74.9% of the subjects had restrained themselves from getting the treatment thinking that the prosthetic treatment is expensive.

Conclusion: On summarizing the data obtained from the survey, it was understood that there is a strong requirement to create awareness among people about the prosthodontic rehabilitation of missing teeth. Even though there are many government programs and schemes that offer the essential dental treatments for free of cost, due to lack of awareness and knowledge regarding the same, the general public is still not approaching for the improvement of their oral health status and ignoring their dental problems thinking that the treatment is too expensive. Therefore, it is of utmost importance for the dentists to reach out to the general public, create awareness about the importance of oral health and various facilities available from the government for the dental treatments and extend the treatment hoping to improve their future quality of life through dental camps and prosthodontic outreach programs.

<p><strong>Background:</strong> The prosthodontic health status and prosthodontic rehabilitation of Bengaluru city&rsquo;s local population are not well documented. As prosthodontists, it is important to know how much concerned the people are towards oral health and what is their attitude, how aware are they about various available treatments and how much knowledge do they have about its importance in order to give them oral health education, create awareness and help develop the practice guidelines. Hence, the aim of the survey was to assess the knowledge, awareness and attitude of the general population in Bengaluru city towards prosthodontic rehabilitation.</p> <p><strong>Material and Methods:</strong> We divided Bengaluru city (total area of about 286 sq. miles) arbitrarily into four zones, namely, North zone, South zone, East zone and West zone. A total of 2516 subjects belonging to the age group of 35 to 74 years from all the four zones were surveyed with a questionnaire which was either in English or in Kannada (local language) with sixteen closed-ended questions. The statistical analysis of the data collected through the questionnaire was done using SPSS (V-22) software.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> The age of the subjects who participated in the survey ranged between thirty-five to seventy-four years. Among the 2516 subjects, 1283 were male subjects and 1233 were female subjects. It was found that most of the subjects (77.2%) visited the oral health care provider only when they had any dental problems. About 54.4% of the subjects who participated in the survey had not got their missing teeth replaced. About 74.9% of the subjects had restrained themselves from getting the treatment thinking that the prosthetic treatment is expensive.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>On summarizing the data obtained from the survey, it was understood that there is a strong requirement to create awareness among people about the prosthodontic rehabilitation of missing teeth. Even though there are many government programs and schemes that offer the essential dental treatments for free of cost, due to lack of awareness and knowledge regarding the same, the general public is still not approaching for the improvement of their oral health status and ignoring their dental problems thinking that the treatment is too expensive. Therefore, it is of utmost importance for the dentists to reach out to the general public, create awareness about the importance of oral health and various facilities available from the government for the dental treatments and extend the treatment hoping to improve their future quality of life through dental camps and prosthodontic outreach programs.</p>
Keywords
Knowledge, Attitude, Awareness, Prosthodontic rehabilitation
Downloads
  • 1
    FullTextPDF
Article

Introduction

Edentulism remains a major form of disease worldwide leading to functional limitation and also physical, psychological and social disability. Various prosthetic treatment modalities are available for the patients to replace their missing teeth that includes removable partial dentures or fixed partial dentures, complete dentures, implants etc.1,2 Understanding the mind-set of the general population for the replacement of the missing teeth, further acknowledgment and attending to the needs, play an important role in their acceptance of the prosthetic rehabilitation.3 Involvement of a broader range of individuals in the evaluation of prosthodontic rehabilitation is very important and hence the attitude of not just patients visiting the dental practitioners, but also the entire general population is required. An analysis of the attitude towards prosthodontic rehabilitation of the entire community provides us the valuable insights that are not ordinarily gained in dental practice, and also, such a study tells us what people know about certain things, how they feel and how they behave towards it.4- 9 Literature search reveals that there is no documented evidence regarding the prosthodontic health status and prosthetic rehabilitation needs of the Bengaluru general population.10 Hence the present survey was undertaken to explore the knowledge, awareness and attitude towards prosthodontic rehabilitation among the general population in Bengaluru city.

Methods

Sample size calculation

N= (4Pq/ L2) D

Where,

P=prevalence value=55.7% (17)

L= Allowable error = 5% of p value= 2.8

D= Design effect = 2, q= (1-P) = 44

Therefore, N= (4×56×44×2) / (2.8× 2.8) = 2514 Approximated to 2516.

A total of 2516 subjects gave their consent (Annexure1) and participated in the survey. A self-made questionnaire (Annexure-II) which was written either in English/ Kannada language was given to the participants. The self-made questionnaire had two parts. Part 1 had the provision to collect the socio-demographic data, while Part 2 had sixteen closed ended questions (out of which six were awareness based, five were knowledge based and five were attitude based). Strategies for coding were developed and applied in the questionnaire for the purpose of statistical analysis.

Bengaluru city was arbitrarily divided into four zones namely, North, South, East and West for administrative purposes. From each zone, 629 participants were selected using multistage random sampling technique.

The above diagram represents how the multi-stage random sampling was done in one zone and the same methodology was applied in all the four zones in order to arrive at the sample size of 2516.

Stage 1: One Corporation Ward in each zone was randomly selected (From four zones, we will have four corporate wards).

Stage 2: From each ward four localities were sampled randomly (Four localities from each ward amounts to sixteen localities).

Stage 3: Four lanes from each locality were randomly selected (Four lanes from each locality and sixteen localities out of four wards amounts to sixty-four lanes).

Stage 4: Eligible participants in the households from one end of the lane to another end were surveyed. Selection criteria

Inclusion criteria

Subjects belonging to the age group of 35-74 years, both males and females.

Exclusion criteria

Participants with psychological disorders were excluded

Participants who were unable to comprehend and respond to the questions were excluded

The persons associated with dentistry were excluded from the study.

Statistical analysis: The responses from all the questionnaires containing 16 closed ended questions were analysed for descriptive statistics using SPSS software (Version-22). The level of significance was kept at 5%. The interpretation of the statistical analysis of the compiled data is as follows.

Results

Among 2516 subjects, 70.3% (1768) subjects belonged to the age group 35 to 55 years and 29.7% (748) belonged to the age group 55 to 74 years.

Among 2516 subjects, 51% were male and 49% were female participants.

Among the 2516 subjects, 11.6% visited the dentist once in 6 months, 11.2% visited once in 12 months and 77.2% visited only when there was a problem.

45.5% of subjects had got their missing teeth replaced, 54.4% had not got their missing teeth replaced. 71.3% of subjects were aware that the missing teeth had to be replaced, whereas 28.7% were unaware of it.

78.5% of subjects left it to their respective dentists to decide regarding their prosthetic treatment; 15.4% would decide themselves regarding their prosthetic treatment, 6.1% of the subjects did not know.

After the prosthetic treatment, 73.4% thought that quality of life will improve, 5.4% thought it will not improve and 21.3% did not know if there would be any changes in their general wellbeing.

74.9% of subjects thought that the cost of prosthesis is expensive, 23.3% thought that it was not expensive, 2.8% did not know if the prosthetic treatment is expensive or not.

64.9% of the participants had missing teeth and 35.1% of them had all the teeth present.

22.3% of subjects were edentulous for a duration of 0-6 months, 13.3% were edentulous for a duration of 6-12 months and 29.3% were edentulous for more than a year.

71.3% of the participants were aware that the missing teeth have to be replaced while the remaining 28.7% were not aware of the same.

The prime concern or expectation from prosthetic treatment in 11.6% subjects was speech, was functional purpose in 48.5% and appearance in about 10.1%. 19.4% were concerned about speech, function and appearance, while 10.4% were not interested in any of it.

8.2% of the subjects did not get the prosthetic treatment done with the fear of swallowing the prosthesis, 7.8% had a fear of dislodgement of prosthesis, 11.6% had a fear of gagging, 12.6% had a fear of discomfort, 9.5% had a fear of allergic reaction, 50.3% subjects did not respond as to why they did not take prosthetic treatment.

59.8% subjects felt that artificial teeth do help in reducing the problems caused by the missing teeth, 7.8% felt that artificial teeth do not help and 32.4% did not know if the artificial teeth will help improve their oral function.

59.4% would prefer to go to dental clinics for replacing their missing teeth, 29.3% would prefer to go to government hospitals, 10.2% prefer to go to dental colleges and 1.1% prefer other optional places for replacing their missing teeth.

38.2% knew about complete denture treatment, 14.9% knew about removable partial denture treatment, 15% knew about fixed partial denture, 11.4% knew about implants, 20.3% knew none of the treatments available and 0.2% knew all the treatments available for rehabilitation.

63.4% of subjects chose fixed prosthesis, 24.4% chose removable prosthesis and 12.2% did not know what type of prosthesis to choose.

34.9% of subjects thought implant is the best mode of treatment, 12.2% thought implant is not a better mode of treatment and 52.9% did not know if implant is better mode of treatment for replacing the missing teeth.

82.2% of subjects thought that prosthesis needs oral hygiene maintenance, 7.2% thought that prosthesis did not require oral hygiene maintenance and 10.6% did not know if the prosthesis required oral hygiene maintenance.

Discussion On analysing the responses of the subjects in Bengaluru city, it was found that restoring the function was the predominant reason to get prosthetic treatment which was same as in Jordan city (Edward Lynch, et al.).11

Only 11.9% population in Bengaluru knew about dental implants whereas in entire South India about 17.8% population had knowledge about implants as reported by Mayya A, et al. 12

Around eighty two percent of the population in Bengaluru thought that oral hygiene maintenance of artificial prosthesis is a must, whereas in Jabalpur city it was 74.8% of population (Gupta S, et al.). In a study done by Al Quaran FA and his colleagues, about 60% of the population had good knowledge about the fixed prosthesis and 47.5% knew about removable partial dentures and 57% about dental implants. In Bengaluru city, 38.2% knew about complete denture treatment, 14.9% knew about removable partial denture treatment, 15% knew about fixed partial denture, 11.4% knew about implants, while 20.3% knew none of the treatments available and only 0.2% knew about all the treatments available for rehabilitation. However, the study by Al Quaran had only 200 participants.13

For prosthodontic rehabilitation, about 83.5% chose fixed partial denture as reported by Al Quaran FA and his colleagues while 63.4% of subjects chose fixed prosthesis in the present study.13

It was reported that 27.5% of people of Aseer region, Saudi Arabia were not aware that missing teeth has to be replaced, which is similar to the findings of present study where 28.7% were not aware of the same in Bengaluru city.14

In the present study, it was observed that 45.5% of the Bengaluru population had got their missing teeth replaced, whereas in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, about 53.1% of people got their missing teeth replaced.15

Hence from the analysis, we can conclude that the knowledge, awareness and attitude levels can vary among the people due to various factors like age, gender, education, place etc. However, the subjects showed a positive attitude towards prosthetic treatment as it can restore normal function. It is hence important to develop practice guidelines and provide education and create awareness among the population for a better and healthy society.

Conflicts of Interest

None

Supporting File
References

1. Nirupama R, Mahalaxmi Y, Lakshmi R. An epidemiological survey to evaluate the awareness of anterior teeth restorations in the South west coastal population of India. J Evolution Med Dent Sci 2018; 50(7):6163-67.

2. Kalk W, Kayser AF, Witter DJ. Needs for tooth replacement. Int Dent J 1993;43(1):41-9.

3. Raj N, Reddy N, Japatti S, Thomas M, Uthappa R. Attitudes towards prosthodontics rehabilitation and utilization of Dental services among Songadh and Amargadh population. J Dent Med Med Sci 2014;4(1):1-6.

4. K. KaliyaPerumal K. Guideline for conducting a knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) study. Comm Ophthalmol 2004;4(1):7-9.

5. Andrade C, Menon V, Ameen S, Praharaj SK. Designing and conducting knowledge, attitude and practice surveys in Psychiatry: Practical Guidelines. Indian J Psychol Med 2020;42(5):478-481.

6. Shigil K, Hebbal M, Angadi GS. Attitude towards replacement of teeth among patients at the institute of Dental Sciences, Belgaum, India. J Dent Educa 2007;7(11):1467-1475.

7. Dandekeri S, Hegde C, Zunjarrao BV. A survey to evaluate attitude towards replacement of missing teeth in patients among south coastal areas of Karna taka. J Oral Heal Comm Dent 2016;10(3):69-73.

8. Jayasinghe RM, Perera J, Jayasinghe V, Thilakumara IP, Rasnayaka S, Shiraz MH, et al. Awareness, attitudes, need and demand on replacement of missing teeth among a group of partially dentate patients attending a University Dental Hospital. BMC Res Notes 2017;10(1):334.

9. Gupta S, Mantri SS, Bhasin A. Knowledge and attitude towards prosthodontic rehabilitation and utilization of dental services by central India population of Jabalpur City, India. Ann Med Health Sci Res 2018;8(2):12-15.

10. Ravindranath NS, Manikyam A. Public attitude towards dentists and dental services in Bangalore City, India. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent 2014; 12(2):100-5.

11. AL-Dwairi ZN, EL Masoud BM, AL-Afifi SA, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Lynch E. Awareness, attitude, and expectations towards dental implants among removable prostheses wearers. J Prosthodont 2014;23(3):192-7.

12. Mayya A, D’souza J, George AM, Shenoy K, Jodalli P, Mayya SS, et al. Knowledge and awareness of dental implants as a treatment choice in adult population in South India: A hospital based study. Indian J Dent Res 2018;29(3):263.

13. Al Quaran FA, Al-Ghalayini RF, Al- Zubi BN. Single tooth replacement and factors affecting different prosthetic treatment modalities. BMC Oral Health 2011;11:34.

14. Alshehri MD, Alqahtani WM, Asiri EM, Asiri MN. Awareness to consequences of teeth missing and prosthodontics treatment options among people of Aseer region, Saudi Arabia. J Family Med Prim Care 2021;10(1):307.

15. Assery MK. Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding prosthodontic rehabilitation and factors affecting the patients visiting private clinics in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study. J Family Med Prim Care 2019;8(10):3362.

HealthMinds Logo
RGUHS Logo

© 2024 HealthMinds Consulting Pvt. Ltd. This copyright specifically applies to the website design, unless otherwise stated.

We use and utilize cookies and other similar technologies necessary to understand, optimize, and improve visitor's experience in our site. By continuing to use our site you agree to our Cookies, Privacy and Terms of Use Policies.