The rural landscape of the United States forms special challenges for those living in rural communities that are not seen in the urban or suburban setting. According to the Maternal and Child Health Bureau in 2014 15.5% of children in the United States were living in rural areas (“Rural and Urban Children,” 2014). Rural areas were defined by the US Census bureau as any area with 50,000 or less people, or urban clusters with less than 2,500 people. Assessing oral health status of those in rural areas presents unique challenges. Challenges are due to geography and the spread of sparse populations over large areas of land. In reviewing the literature related to the question, do children in rural areas have higher caries risk, it became evident …show more content…
Most literature related to rural oral health are centered on studying access to care. Paper’s related solely to access to care were not included because they did not directly answer the research question. After reviewing the literature, papers were chosen based on the research most clearly addressing the question of caries risk in rural children. Additionally, a papers were selected because elements addressed by the studies helped to create a complete picture of the challenges facing rural communities in lowering caries risk and increasing access to care. Papers were also chosen that presented a full picture of the challenges of collecting data from a rural landscape. All papers chosen were cross-sectional studies and were published between 1999 and 2016. The final papers chosen and evaluated were Oral Health Status of Children and Adolescents by Rural Residence, Is There an Appalachian Disparity in Dental Caries in Pennsylvania Schoolchildren?, Dental Caries and Fluorosis in Schoolchildren in a Rural Georgia Area, Geography Matters: state-level variation in children’s oral health care access and oral health status, and Oral Health Status of preschool children attending Head Start in …show more content…
Adair et al., utilized methods for this study where children were examined by calibrated two dentists and parents completing a questionnaire about fluoride exposure. The population in this study included children whose school drinking water was fluoridated. Differences between the population groups came from home water supply either being fluoridated or non-fluoridated. A major limitation of this study is that only a small sample size in rural Georgia was assessed.
Geography matters: state-level variation in children’s oral health care access and oral health status examined the differences in children’s oral health status and access to care between states. Data from this study was derived from the 2007 Survey of Children’s Health. The population of interest in this study was children age 2- 17. The study also considered child, family, and community variables that may impact oral health status and access to care. Limitations of this study included data restrictions as private insurance data was difficult to access (Fisher – Owens et al,
Underserved and Low-income populations face high rates of untreated dental diseases due to low access to dental treatment. One of the main causes of this problem is lack of participating dentists or poor distribution of dentists due to transportation problems. Untreated oral diseases are often seen in low-income communities and underserved populations The most common oral diseases that manifest in underserved populations are periodontal diseases and dental caries
HURST is a man in his late thirties who has coated his road to Hell with the blood of his intentions one gold piece at a time in the name of love. Now, offered a hefty sum of gold to rob a stagecoach without knowing its contents, Hurst and the group of outlaws he runs with, lead by ISAAC, find themselves on a hillside awaiting its arrival. In a possible double cross, the stagecoach is overwhelmed by another band of outlaws.
Hundreds of years ago, the dental profession and the medical profession was perceived as two separate entities, however, this bifurcated health system has created an epidemic in oral disease with our aging population (Nagro, 2016). Dentistry should be more closely integrated with medicine and the health care system, however, organized dentistry has fought to stay a monopoly. They have protested regarding dental personnel being independent, even in the advancement of serving more rural areas, just as they repelled being part of Medicare. Finally, there are a few states that have alternative choices for a dental hygienist to travel to people who can’t get to a traditional dental office. Some of these states include Minnesota, Colorado, Oregon,
Over 130 million Americans do not have dental insurance. On top of that, almost a million emergency room visits last year resulted from preventable oral conditions. Many Americans today are unaware of how the condition of their dentition affects their overall health. Socioeconomic limitations, the lack of dental education in parents, eating habits, and simply the availability of dentists plays a key role in the state of children’s oral health; implementing a universal dental care program will help lower the barriers that many people face when it comes to receiving the dental care they need. The program will target high-risk individuals who are prone to dental caries and provide them with standard
The socioeconomic background of people is a major factor that dictates whether or not they will receive dental care. According to the American Journal of Public Health, “Children from a low socioeconomic status have been shown to have a high risk of dental caries”(Simmer-Beck 1764). Many children today do not receive the dental care they need because of their parents’ income. Going to the dentist is expensive for people without dental insurance so many people tend to blow it off; but what they don’t realize is that the condition of their mouth often dictates the state of the rest of their health. An internet source in correspondence with the American Journal of Public Health stated that, “More than half of low income-children without
The method from Health Education Journal was based on collecting and evaluating evidence, “…using a combined approach incorporating the Cochrane Public Health and Health Promotion Field Handbook and the Health Gains Notation in order to a develop a synthesis approach to reporting,” (Satur et al., 2010). However, Community Dental Health utilized electronic searching, iterative-hand searching, critical appraisal and data synthesis in which the primary research reviewed settings were at clinical, community, schools or other institutions in which children, elderly, people with handicaps and disabilities were the participants. Another difference in both articles is the conclusions. Community Dental Health concluded that the use of fluoride is efficient in reducing caries through oral health promotion, chairside oral health promotion is shown to be effective; however mass media programs have not. On the other hand, the article from Health Education Journal states that even though there is a respectable support in incorporating the oral health into the general health promotion, it is vital to observe the outcomes in oral health terms.
Oral health has a direct impact on the general health, hence, it is important that all Canadians have adequate access to dental care services. Over the years successive Governments have reduced financial support to programs delivering dental care to most vulnerable populations. As a result, many low income families and other vulnerable groups have been unable to access dental care. There is further escalation in the disparities in oral health care among Canadians, as the number of Canadians losing dental care benefits continues to increase. Also, higher oral health care costs can be expected in the near future due to shortage of health care professionals.
The first health disparity I would like to discuss is Oral health interventions among Hispanics, especially among Hispanic children. An article, “Community-based oral health self-care intervention for Hispanic families”, By Hull and other authors, focuses on monitories who are at high risk for poor oral health have dental caries, oral disease and not having much access to dental care based on their socioeconomic status Hull, 2013).
(2015) and Dodd et al. (2014), Decker & Lipton (2015) have utilized data qualitatively, which verily served the purpose of gaining rich information on the perceptions of the respondents on dental care and health. This is also important to consider, especially since most of the studies are done quantitatively. Although both qualitative and quantitative studies are good on their own, both also have considerable weaknesses. It would be interesting as well to see more researches done in mixed method in order to fill in the weaknesses of these two. It will be also good to note if the study by Decker & Lipton (2015) can be replicated in different sample—such as other minority groups or a more heterogeneous sample. In this way, the scholar literature can be expanded by our knowledge about dental health that is growing to be a public health issue in United States and in other parts of the world. Given the qualitative data gathered by Decker & Lipton (2015), it will be helpful if better public policies are made to cater to these sensitive populations. This is also true in the suggestion of Dodd et al. (2014) on the widening of the Medicaid coverage among adults—and on the reconsideration not to deflouridate the water supply in New York in the study by Edelstein et al. (2015). As mentioned by Edelstein et al. (2015), removing the fluoride content in the New York water supply could only worsen the rates of early childhood carries. In the long run,
Oral health in Australia is a concern. The impact of poor dental health can instigate ulcers, gingivitis, gum disease and damage one’s overall health. Tooth decay is extensive among Australian adults, and tooth aches are a considerable amount of hospital admission for children (Parliament of Australia, 2013). Two in three children aged 14 years have deteriorated permanent teeth, while three in ten adults receive no treatment at all. Adults living in rural Australia are 1.7 times more likely to have no teeth than those in major cities. 14 percent of children and 37 percent of adults avoid or delaying seeing a dentist due to costs (Australian Institude of Health and Welfare, 2012). The advantages of installing a dental program within
Alaskan Tribal Members are a prime example of just how difficult it is to provide accessible healthcare to Native Americans. In a study about improving the oral health of Alaskan Natives, published on PubMed Central of the National Center for Biotechnology Information, it was stated that “Disregarding the 3 largest population centers in Alaska [Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau], the state has a population density of about 0.5 people per square mile,
This paper is organized into five main sections. The first section discusses the existing literature on oral health care in provincial Canada, as well as, issues of access and use of dental health services. The second section specifically focuses on the data used in the study and the methods of analysing the data. In addition, this section also delves into the models used in determining relationships and associations between the key dependent variables (consultation with a dentist, an actual visit to a dentist, and last time visited a dentist) and socio-economic and health characteristics of respondents as independent variables. The third section of the paper then presents the findings of the descriptive and inferential statistics generated from the data. The fourth section discusses the results of the study in relation to reviewed literature, as well as, their implications on provincial and federal health policies. The limitations of the study in terms of methodology and analysis are subsequently discussed in this section too. The fifth section concludes the paper with an overview of the findings of the study and inter-provincial differences in access and use of dental services in Alberta, Manitoba and Newfoundland.
Resting on the above-mentioned information, one realizes the fact that in terms of a multilevel approach to epidemiology the complex of actions is needed to improve the state of the oral health of people who belong to low-income communities. Only significant improvement of the conditions under which people live could have the positive impact on their health. That is why, in order to protect them from caries new program should be created. People should be explained the main aspects of healthy living and provide with the constant access to various health facilities. Only under these conditions some positive shits oculd be
Although considered preventable, 53.6% of Medicaid eligible kindergarteners studied in California had a history of dental caries and 27.8 % had decay present at the time of the screening (Dental Health Foundation, 2006). Teaching young children effective oral hygiene techniques is the most effective way to protect the child’s teeth and help them to develop a daily oral wellness routine ("Dental Health," 2015). By focusing on those most in need, Medicaid eligible preschool aged children, teaching and reinforcing effective oral hygiene strategies early in life will foster a lifelong habit of oral health wellness (Gardner, Lally, & Wardle, 2012).
Dental caries is the most common oral health problem that affects deciduous and permanent teeth.. Dental caries among children (Early Childhood Caries) is a serious concern. Children with chronic and acute dental caries have poorer quality of life than caries-free children in areas of behaviour, mood, pain, and parental impact [1]. Other than that, oral infection can occur. It may spread and causes other complications. The child may also have poor self esteem as the decayed teeth and restorations are visible.. ECC might cause damage to the permanent teeth. A number of risk factors are associated with ECC, which can be broadly classified into biological and social risk factors [2]. The risk factors of ECC includes microbiological, dietary and