Prevalence of single-tooth-gaps as potential for implants - results from SHIP-0
Author(s)
Mack, Florian
SA, Samietz
Mundt, T.
Proff, P.
Gedrange, T.
Kocher, T.
Biffar, R.
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2007
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Objectives: For public health planners, the prevalence of single-tooth gaps is important to know in order to estimate costs of health insurance. Today there are no data available which focus on evidence-based studies. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the prevalence of single-tooth loss in a population-based study. Methods: The data of 3989 subjects (aged 20-74 years) were taken from the cross-sectional Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP-0) and classified by age, gender, and educational level. A single-tooth gap was determined to be a gap of a missing single-tooth bordered by one or more natural teeth. Results: The ...
View more >Objectives: For public health planners, the prevalence of single-tooth gaps is important to know in order to estimate costs of health insurance. Today there are no data available which focus on evidence-based studies. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the prevalence of single-tooth loss in a population-based study. Methods: The data of 3989 subjects (aged 20-74 years) were taken from the cross-sectional Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP-0) and classified by age, gender, and educational level. A single-tooth gap was determined to be a gap of a missing single-tooth bordered by one or more natural teeth. Results: The tooth most missing in all age-groups was the first molar. There were more single-tooth gaps in the maxilla than in the mandible. The lowest single-tooth loss were found in the mandibular anterior region (<1.1%). There were no significant differences in gender (p>0.05). Among all groups the frequency of single-tooth gaps, subjects with a medium educational level showed the highest frequency and in subjects with high educational level the lowest frequency. The prevalence of having one single-tooth loss depended on educational level and was between 3.8% and 13.1% whereas for subjects with 5 and more single-tooth gaps it was less than 0.5%. The prevalence of one single-tooth gaps among all subjects was 25%, whereas 16% of all subjects had two single-tooth gaps. Conclusion: Due to an increased knowledge of oral hygiene, the use of fluorides, and an increased consciousness of healthy living, the teeth next to single-tooth gaps are healthy or have minimal restorations. But there is a high potential for implants. Therefore the treatment plans involving implants should be considered together with traditional treatments such as FPD's.
View less >
View more >Objectives: For public health planners, the prevalence of single-tooth gaps is important to know in order to estimate costs of health insurance. Today there are no data available which focus on evidence-based studies. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the prevalence of single-tooth loss in a population-based study. Methods: The data of 3989 subjects (aged 20-74 years) were taken from the cross-sectional Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP-0) and classified by age, gender, and educational level. A single-tooth gap was determined to be a gap of a missing single-tooth bordered by one or more natural teeth. Results: The tooth most missing in all age-groups was the first molar. There were more single-tooth gaps in the maxilla than in the mandible. The lowest single-tooth loss were found in the mandibular anterior region (<1.1%). There were no significant differences in gender (p>0.05). Among all groups the frequency of single-tooth gaps, subjects with a medium educational level showed the highest frequency and in subjects with high educational level the lowest frequency. The prevalence of having one single-tooth loss depended on educational level and was between 3.8% and 13.1% whereas for subjects with 5 and more single-tooth gaps it was less than 0.5%. The prevalence of one single-tooth gaps among all subjects was 25%, whereas 16% of all subjects had two single-tooth gaps. Conclusion: Due to an increased knowledge of oral hygiene, the use of fluorides, and an increased consciousness of healthy living, the teeth next to single-tooth gaps are healthy or have minimal restorations. But there is a high potential for implants. Therefore the treatment plans involving implants should be considered together with traditional treatments such as FPD's.
View less >
Conference Title
85th General Session & Exhibition of the IADR
Publisher URI
Copyright Statement
Self-archiving of the author-manuscript version is not yet supported by this Publisher. Please refer to the conference link for access to the definitive, published version or contact the author(s) for more information.
Subject
Dentistry not elsewhere classified