A Comparison Between Parents with Different Attitudes Towards Topical Fluoride Application for Their Children: A Cross-Sectional Study.

IF 1.4 4区医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Oral health & preventive dentistry Pub Date : 2025-01-09 DOI:10.3290/j.ohpd.c_1804

Hilal Özbey İpek, Arif Bolaca

{"title":"A Comparison Between Parents with Different Attitudes Towards Topical Fluoride Application for Their Children: A Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Hilal Özbey İpek, Arif Bolaca","doi":"10.3290/j.ohpd.c_1804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Although fluoride is known to be effective and safe, an increasing number of parents refuse to allow fluoride applications for their children. This study aimed to compare the parents who accepted and rejected fluoride application for their children in terms of their attitudes toward fluoride and vaccinations, sociodemographic characteristics, and source of knowledge.Materials and methods: In this cross-sectional study, a previously validated questionnaire was administered to 85 parents who did not consent to have topical fluoride applied to their children's teeth (AF group) and the 143 parents who consented to have it applied (F group) in a pediatric dentistry clinic. Data were analysed using the independent t-test and chi-squared test.Results: In the F group, the number of those who disagreed with the statement that fluoride causes intellectual disability, autism, and damages the pineal gland was statistically significantly higher than in the AF group (p 0.05). The most common source of information for the AF group was the internet/social media (67.06%), while for the F group, it was dentists/medical doctors (62.24%). More parents in the F group stated that childhood and Covid-19 vaccinations must be performed; this was a statistically significant difference (p 0.05).Conclusion: No relationship was found between fluoride hesitancy and the educational level of the parents. Most parents in the AF group have doubts and concerns about fluoride rather than being strongly opposed to it. Therefore, educational programs given to parents are likely to have a positive effect on their acquisition of correct information.","PeriodicalId":19696,"journal":{"name":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","volume":"23 ","pages":"27-34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.ohpd.c_1804","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Although fluoride is known to be effective and safe, an increasing number of parents refuse to allow fluoride applications for their children. This study aimed to compare the parents who accepted and rejected fluoride application for their children in terms of their attitudes toward fluoride and vaccinations, sociodemographic characteristics, and source of knowledge.

Materials and methods: In this cross-sectional study, a previously validated questionnaire was administered to 85 parents who did not consent to have topical fluoride applied to their children's teeth (AF group) and the 143 parents who consented to have it applied (F group) in a pediatric dentistry clinic. Data were analysed using the independent t-test and chi-squared test.

Results: In the F group, the number of those who disagreed with the statement that fluoride causes intellectual disability, autism, and damages the pineal gland was statistically significantly higher than in the AF group (p 0.05). The most common source of information for the AF group was the internet/social media (67.06%), while for the F group, it was dentists/medical doctors (62.24%). More parents in the F group stated that childhood and Covid-19 vaccinations must be performed; this was a statistically significant difference (p 0.05).

Conclusion: No relationship was found between fluoride hesitancy and the educational level of the parents. Most parents in the AF group have doubts and concerns about fluoride rather than being strongly opposed to it. Therefore, educational programs given to parents are likely to have a positive effect on their acquisition of correct information.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

不同家长对儿童局部氟化物应用态度的比较：一项横断面研究。

目的：虽然氟化物已知是有效和安全的，但越来越多的父母拒绝让他们的孩子使用氟化物。本研究旨在比较接受和拒绝儿童氟化的父母对氟化物和疫苗接种的态度、社会人口学特征和知识来源。材料和方法：在本横断面研究中，对85名不同意在儿童牙科诊所使用局部氟化物的家长（AF组）和143名同意在儿童牙科诊所使用氟化物的家长（F组）进行了先前有效的问卷调查。数据分析采用独立t检验和卡方检验。结果：F组不同意氟化物导致智力残疾、自闭症、损害松果体说法的人数明显高于AF组（p < 0.05）。AF组最常见的信息来源是互联网/社交媒体（67.06%），而F组最常见的信息来源是牙医/医生（62.24%）。F组中更多的家长表示，必须进行儿童和Covid-19疫苗接种；差异有统计学意义（p 0.05）。结论：氟化物犹豫与家长文化程度无关。AF组的大多数家长对氟化物持怀疑和担忧态度，而不是强烈反对。因此，给父母的教育计划可能对他们获得正确的信息有积极的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Oral health & preventive dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Clinicians, general practitioners, teachers, researchers, and public health administrators will find this journal an indispensable source of essential, timely information about scientific progress in the fields of oral health and the prevention of caries, periodontal diseases, oral mucosal diseases, and dental trauma. Central topics, including oral hygiene, oral epidemiology, oral health promotion, and public health issues, are covered in peer-reviewed articles such as clinical and basic science research reports; reviews; invited focus articles, commentaries, and guest editorials; and symposium, workshop, and conference proceedings.