Association between pulp and periapical conditions and dental emergency visits involving pain relief: epidemiological profile and risk indicators in private practice in Australia

Aim To assess the prevalence of dental emergency visits (DEV) involving pain relief and their relationship with socio‐economic and clinical factors in an Australian representative sample in the primary care setting. Methodology Data on reason for visit and patient characteristics were collected from...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International endodontic journal 2020-07, Vol.53 (7), p.887-894
Main Authors: Franciscatto, G. J., Brennan, D. S., Gomes, M. S., Rossi‐Fedele, G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Decay
Dental care
Dental pulp
Dentistry
Emergency medical care
emergency treatment
Epidemiology
Gum disease
Pain
periapical periodontitis
Primary care
primary health care
Public health
pulpitis
Regression analysis
Socioeconomic factors
Statistical analysis
Teeth
Trauma
Uninsured people
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim To assess the prevalence of dental emergency visits (DEV) involving pain relief and their relationship with socio‐economic and clinical factors in an Australian representative sample in the primary care setting. Methodology Data on reason for visit and patient characteristics were collected from a representative random sample of Australian dentists in private practice surveyed in 2009–2010. Information regarding socio‐economic (gender, age, health insurance) and clinical factors (number of teeth, number of decayed teeth, diagnosis and reason for visit [DEV, check‐up, other reasons not involving pain relief]) were retrieved from compiled questionnaires. Descriptive statistics were reported, and Poisson regression models were used to assess the association between socio‐economic and clinical factors and DEV. Prevalence ratio (PR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Results A total of 1148 dentists responded (67%), resulting in records from 6504 patients. The overall prevalence of DEV was 20.8%. The unadjusted analysis, according to the reason of visit, revealed the following predictors for DEV: male gender (PR = 1.18; 95% CI = 1.08–1.29), age 18–64 years (PR = 2.70; 95% CI = 2.19–3.33) and over 65 years (PR = 2.64, 95% CI = 2.10–3.32), uninsured patients (PR = 1.36; 95% CI = 1.24–1.49), patients with
ISSN:0143-2885
1365-2591
DOI:10.1111/iej.13293