4.4 Article

Oral mucosal lesions and risk habits among men in an Italian study population

Journal

JOURNAL OF ORAL PATHOLOGY & MEDICINE
Volume 30, Issue 1, Pages 22-28

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0714.2001.300104.x

Keywords

actinic cheilitis; alcohol drinking; coated tongue; oral leukoplakia; tobacco smoking

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A randomly selected study population of 118 male subjects (greater than or equal to 40 years) living on the Mediterranean island of Pantelleria (southwest of Sicily, Italy) was examined for the presence of oral mucosal lesions, with particular emphasis on the early diagnosis of oral precancerous and cancerous lesions. The study population was interviewed for socioeconomic and behavioural information, and clinically examined using WHO criteria. The prevalence of oral mucosal lesions observed, and data obtained about oral hygiene, tobacco smoking, alcohol drinking and exposure to actinic radiation, were analysed. Alcohol drinking was the most common habit in the study population (73%), followed by tobacco smoking (58.5%, of whom 96% were cigarette smokers). Only 3% showed good oral hygiene and 25% were edentate. Oral lesions were observed in 81.3% of the study group, mainly coated tongue (51.4%), leukoplakia (13.8%), traumatic oral lesions (traumatic ulcers and frictional white lesions) in 9.2%, actinic cheilitis (4.6%), and squamous cell carcinoma in one case (0.9%). Statistically significant associations were found between the prevalence of coated tongue and tobacco smoking (P<0.0001), and between the prevalence of actinic cheilitis and tobacco smoking/alcohol drinking (P<0.05). Analysis of clinical and anamnestic data underlined the effective presence, in the population examined, of the behavioural risk factors for oral precancerous and cancerous lesions, and the lack of cultural motivation towards primary prevention activities, such as the elimination of risk habits.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available