朱琳虹, 李佳慧, 周美西, 兰花. 40名备孕期妇女口腔健康干预效果观察[J]. 上海预防医学, 2021, 33(11): 1046-1051. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.21028
引用本文: 朱琳虹, 李佳慧, 周美西, 兰花. 40名备孕期妇女口腔健康干预效果观察[J]. 上海预防医学, 2021, 33(11): 1046-1051. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.21028
ZHU Lin-hong, LI Jia-hui, ZHOU Mei-xi, LAN Hua. Effect of education intervention on oral health in 40 pre-pregnancy women[J]. Shanghai Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2021, 33(11): 1046-1051. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.21028
Citation: ZHU Lin-hong, LI Jia-hui, ZHOU Mei-xi, LAN Hua. Effect of education intervention on oral health in 40 pre-pregnancy women[J]. Shanghai Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2021, 33(11): 1046-1051. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.21028

40名备孕期妇女口腔健康干预效果观察

Effect of education intervention on oral health in 40 pre-pregnancy women

  • 摘要:
    目的调查备孕期妇女口腔健康干预效果。
    方法按照纳入标准选取来自宁夏医科大学总医院生殖医学中心备孕期妇女40名,进行一般情况、菌斑临床评估及口腔健康教育,评估备孕期妇女在接受口腔健康干预前后的口腔健康情况。
    结果在口腔健康状况调查,“刷牙出血”“咀嚼食物困难”“牙齿或牙龈对冷、热或甜刺激敏感”“因为牙齿的原因限制所吃食物的种类和数量”“用药物缓解口腔的疼痛或不适”5项干预前后的比较,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.001)。在口腔保健行为中,干预前后“刷牙次数”“刷牙方式”“饭后漱口”“使用牙线”4项内容的比较中,差异有统计学意义(均P<0.001),“牙刷更换”差异无统计学意义(P=0.467)。在备孕期妇女口腔相关知识知晓情况调查,“牙周病可能致新生儿早产”“牙周病可能致新生儿低体重”“孕前需要口腔检查”“孕期易患口腔疾病”“孕中期是治疗口腔疾病的最佳时期”5项内容干预前后的比较,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.001)。干预后菌斑指数为(4.37±0.94)分,低于干预前的(5.47±1.08)分,差异有统计学意义(t=7.93,P=0.001)。
    结论对口腔健康干预,提高了备孕期妇女的口腔相关知识的知晓程度,在一定程度上也增强了口腔保健水平,可改善备孕期妇女的口腔健康状况。口腔健康干预可有效降低备孕期妇女的菌斑水平,提高菌斑清除效率。

     

    Abstract:
    ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of intervention on oral health of pre-pregnancy women before and after oral health education.
    MethodsA total of 40 pre-pregnancy women were selected from the Reproductive Medicine Center of General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University according to the inclusion criteria, general conditions, clinical evaluation of plaque and oral health education. Their oral health conditions were evaluated before and after oral health intervention.
    ResultsBased on the oral health status survey, there were significant differences between before and after intervention (all P<0.001) in the following five items: “bleeding from brushing teeth”, “difficulty biting or chewing food”, “sensitivity of teeth or gums to cold, hot, or sweet stimuli”, "restriction of the type and amount of food eaten for dental reasons” and “medication for oral pain or discomfort”. There were significant differences between before and after intervention (all P<0.001) in four items of oral health care behavior including “How often do you brush your teeth?”, “How do you brush your teeth?”, “gargle after meals”, and “floss use or not” but showed no significant difference in toothbrush replacement (P=0.467). There were significant differences (all P<0.001) in five items of oral health knowledge including “periodontal disease can lead to premature delivery of newborns”, “periodontal disease can lead to low birth weight of newborns”, “need oral examination before pregnancy”, “pregnancy prone to oral diseases”, “mid-pregnancy is the best period for the treatment of oral diseases”. The oral plaque index before intervention was 5.47±1.08 and reduced to 4.37±0.94 after intervention (t=7.93, P=0.001).
    ConclusionThrough education intervention, the oral health status of pre-pregnancy women can be improved. The knowledge of oral health can be improved and the level of oral health care can be enhanced. Oral health intervention can effectively reduce the level of plaque in pre-pregnancy women and improve the efficiency of plaque clearance.

     

/

返回文章
返回