Research reveals how dental behaviours impact quality of life and caries experience across socioeconomic status, indicating health disparities.
Abstract Objectives:To explore the associations between dental behaviours and quality of life/caries experience, model the influence of dental behaviours on these outcomes across socioeconomic status (SES). Participants: 879 adults aged 45 to 54 from metropolitan Adelaide, South Australia. Research design: Data on SES (household income) and dental behaviours—including frequency of tooth brushing, mouth rinsing, interdental cleaning, dental visiting and self-care practices—were collected via questionnaire. Clinical examinations were completed for 709 participants to assess caries experience using the decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMFT) index. Main outcome measures: Quality of life, extrapolated using the 14-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14), and caries experience via DMFT scores. Results: An inverse SES gradient was observed for both quality of life and caries experience. Lower-income participants had reduced dental visiting scores [17.5 (95% CI: 17.1–18.0)] versus higher-income groups [20.0 (95% CI: 19.6–20.4)], and slightly higher dental self-care scores [17.7 (95% CI: 17.3–18.0)] than mid-income participants [17.6 (95% CI: 17.2–18.0)]. Higher-income individuals were more likely to have visited a dentist in the last 12 months (39.5%) and to brush daily (36.9%) than lower-income individuals (29.7% and 30.0%, respectively). Full behavioural adjustment significantly attenuated SES disparities in quality of life (unadjusted β=–2.7, 95% CI: –3.4 to –2.1; adjusted β=–2.0, 95% CI: –2.7 to –1.3), but not in caries experience (unadjusted β=–0.8, 95% CI: –1.3 to –0.3; adjusted β=–0.7, 95% CI: –1.2 to –0.1). Conclusions: Comprehensive dental behaviours can reduce socioeconomic inequalities in quality of life, but minimally impact caries experience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chugh et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: