4.1 Article

Oral piercing and oral trauma in a New Zealand sample

期刊

DENTAL TRAUMATOLOGY
卷 21, 期 5, 页码 254-257

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2005.00319.x

关键词

oral piercing; gingival recession

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the periodontal and dental trauma resultant from tongue and lip piercings in a convenience sample of 43 adult dental patients. Patients underwent an intra-oral examination followed by the administration of a questionnaire. Each patient was examined for lingual or buccal recession of the upper and lower incisors as well as the extent of abnormal toothwear or trauma on these teeth. Following bivariate analyses, regression analyses were conducted to test the study hypotheses and derive adjusted estimates for the dependent variables. Of the 43 individuals who participated (93.0% females; mean age 21 years; age range 14-34 years) 76.7% had a tongue piercing, 34.9% had a lip piercing, and 11.6% had both. Only four had had their piercing procedure provided by a doctor or dentist. Postpiercing complications were reported by 34.9%. Most of those with a labial piercing (80.0%) had 1+ labial site with gingival recession (GR), and almost one-third of those with a tongue piercing had at least one lingual site with GR. Age was a significant predictor of the prevalence of lingual recession, with the odds of having lingual recession increasing by 1.17 (95% CI 1.01, 1.35) for every year older than 14. Age was the only significant predictor of the number of lingual sites with recession, but was not a predictor of the prevalence of labial recession or the number of affected sites. There were no significant associations between piercings and abnormal toothwear or trauma. These findings suggest that oral piercings are associated with localized gingival recession, and that the providers of such procedures should ensure that, as part of the informed consent process, prospective patients are informed of the likelihood that their periodontal health may be compromised.

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