Journal List > J Korean Acad Oral Health > v.37(4) > 1057580

Lee, Kim, Jo, and Kim: Prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity in a dental hospital

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to develop a dentine hypersensitivity (DH) manual for a dental hospital.

Methods

The records of all DH patients who presented between 2005 to 2010 were analyzed to determine their age group, awareness of DH, and DH distribution before and after dental treatment.

Results

Out of 953,272 patients, data of 4,646 were analyzed. The male to female ratio of DH patients was found to be 1:1:1. The prevalence of DH was highest in patients in the age group of 40-49 years. The DH awareness rate was high to time, temperature and after dental treatment factor in the middle-age group.

Conclusions

Since DH is widely prevalent and common, systematic screening is essential to ensure good oral health.

References

1. Choi ES, Kim SD. An analysis of the concept of pain. Korean J Woman Health Nurs. 2001; 7:284–292.
crossref
2. Coleman TA, Grippo JO, Kinderknecht KE. Cervical dentine hypersensitivity. Part II: Association with abfractive lesions. Quintessence Int. 2000; 31:466–473.
3. Addy M. Etiology and clinical implications of dentine hypersensitivity. Dent Clin North Am. 1990; 34:503–514.
4. Rees JS. The prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity in general dental practice in the UK. J Clin Periodontol. 2000; 27:860–865.
crossref
5. Bal J, Kundalgurki S. Tooth sensitivity prevention and treatment. Oral Health. 1999; 89:33–41.
6. Taani DQ, Awartani F. Prevalence and distribution of dentin hypersensitivity and plaque in a dental hospital population. Quintessence Int. 2001; 32:372–376.
7. Rees JS, Addy M. A cross-sectional study of buccal cervical sensitivity in UK general dental practice and a summary review of prevalence studies. Int J Dent Hyg. 2004; 2:64–69.
crossref
8. Bamise CT, Olusile AO, Oginni AO, Dosumu OO. The prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity among adult patients attending a Nigerian teaching hospital. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2007; 5:49–53.
9. Udoye CI. Pattern and distribution of cervical dentine hypersensitivity in a Nigerian tertiary hospital. Odontostomatol Trop. 2006; 29:19–22.
10. Fischer C, Fischer RG, Wennberg A. Prevalence and distribution of cervical dentine hypersensitivity in a population in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. J Dent. 1992; 20:272–276.
crossref
11. Liu HC, Lan WH, Hsieh CC. Prevalence and distribution of cervical dentin hypersensitivity in a population in Taipei, Taiwan. J Endodon. 1998; 24:45–47.
crossref
12. Rees JS, Addy M. A cross-sectional study of dentine hypersensitivity. J Clin Periodontol. 2002; 29:997–1003.
crossref
13. Chabanski MB, Gillam DG, Bulman JS, Newman HN. Clinical evaluation of cervical dentine sensitivity in a population of patients referred to a specialist periodontology department: a pilot study. J Oral Rehabil. 1997; 24:666–672.
crossref
14. Rees JS, Jin LJ, Lam S, Kudanowska I, Vowles R. The prevalence of dentin hypersensitivity in a hospital clinic population in Hong Kong. J Dent. 2003; 31:453–461.
15. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2009 National health statistics - The fourth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Seoul: Ministry of Health & Welfare;2009.
16. Leonard RH, Haywood VB, Phillips C. Risk factors for developing tooth sensitivity and gingival irritation associated with nightguard vital bleaching. Quintessence Int. 1997; 28:527–534.
17. Trowbridge HO, Silver DR. A review of current approaches to in-office management of tooth hypersensitivity. Dent Clin North Am. 1990; 34:561–581.

Table 1.
Prevalence of dentine hypersensivitity by age group Unit: N (%)
Age group Male Female Total
Sub total DH Sub total DH Sub total DH
20s 208,706 572 226,321 604 435,027 (45.64) 1,176 (0.27)
30s 51,128 302 44,576 346 95.704 (10.04) 648 (0.68)
40s 67,863 503 58,485 524 126,348 (13.25) 1,027 (0.81)
50s 77,711 484 66,367 533 144,078 (15.11) 1,017 (0.71)
60s 74,203 406 77,912 372 152,115 (15.96) 778 (0.51)
Total 479,611 2,267 473,661 2,379 953,272 (100.0) 4,646 (0.49)

DH, patient number of dentine hypersensitivity.

Table 2.
Rate of awareness of category by age group (%)
Category 20s 30-50s 60s
Time Know 75.45 86.21 77.78
Unknown 24.55 13.79 22.22
Location Know 79.74 76.28 78.27
Unknown 20.26 23.72 21.73
Behavioral Temperature 81.10 82.30 81.59
Irritation Diet, flavor 0.76 1.38 0.38
Stiffness 0.57 1.38 0.57
Habit 16.45 14.02 16.13
Usual 1.13 0.92 1.33
Treatment Before 97.94 89.23 97.25
After 2.06 10.77 2.75

Each factors are 100% by age group.

Table 3.
DH distribution of before & after dental treatment by age group Unit: N (%)
Age Before After Total
group Male Female Sub total Male Female Sub total Before After Total
20s 523 (13,.34) 557 (14.21) 1,080 (27.55) 49 (6.74) 47 (6.46) 96 (13.20) 1,080 (23.24) 96 (2.06) 1,176 (25.31)
30s 259 (6.60) 281 (7.17) 540 (13.77) 43 (5.91) 65 (8.94) 108 (14.85) 540 (11.62) 108 (2.32) 648 (13.95)
40s 425 (10.84) 400 (10.20) 825 (21.05) 78 (10.72) 124 (17.05) 202 (27.78) 825 (17.75) 202 (4.34) 1,027 (22.10)
50s 404 (10.30) 420 (10.71) 824 (21.02) 80 (11.00) 113 (15.54) 193 (26.54) 824 (17.73) 193 (4.15) 1,017 (21.89)
60s 355 (9.05) 295 (7.52) 650 (16.58) 51 (7.01) 77 (10.59) 128 (17.60) 650 (13.99) 128 (2.75) 778 (16.75)
Total 1,966 (50.16) 1,953 (49.83) 3,919 (100.0) 301 (41.40) 426 (58.59) 727 (100.0) 3,919 (84.35) 727 (15.65) 4,646 (100.0)

DH, dentine hypersensitivity.

TOOLS
Similar articles