4.1 Article

Dentition of addiction in Queensland: poor dental status and major contributing drugs

期刊

AUSTRALIAN DENTAL JOURNAL
卷 52, 期 2, 页码 144-149

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2007.tb00480.x

关键词

teeth; dental status; heroin; methadone; cannabis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Although it is said that drug addiction is associated with poor dental health, there is little research in this area. In particular, there is little work comparing the effects of the different drugs of addiction. Methods: A cross-sectional patient survey of dental health was undertaken in a family practice comparing opiate and other drug addicts (DA) with non-addicts (NA). The age range was restricted to 19-45 years. Damaged teeth were counted and a semi-quantitative score applied to severity to allow the calculation of an overall dental index. A medical review only was undertaken; recognized dental diagnostic criteria were not applied. Results: There were 233 and 47 respondents in the DA and NA groups, respectively. The mean ages and gender ratios were similar in both groups. DA used more addictive drugs than NA (all P < 0.001). DA had more absent, traumatized, major cavitated and extracted teeth (all P < 0.05). Addicts had a worse severity index (P < 0.02) and dental index (13.13 +/- 24.00 vs. 4.74 +/- 16.03; P < 0.005). Furthermore, dental pathology developed in DA at younger ages than in NA with 56.8% vs. 5.4% of patients younger than 38 years having dental indices more than 10 respectively (OR = 22.98, 95% CI = 5.57-200.65, P < 0.0000001). At multivariate analysis age, gender, and dose and/or duration of tobacco, methadone, morphine, and alcohol were significantly associated with these pathologies. Conclusion: These data are consistent with published dental reports and basic science information that drug addiction has a deleterious effect on dental health, that in addiction this effect is rapid and severe, and that tobacco, methadone, morphine and alcohol contribute importantly to these changes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据