Fluoride hesitancy: A mixed methods study on decision‐making about forms of fluoride.

Objectives: To investigate whether professionally applied topical fluoride‐hesitant caregivers are also hesitant about other forms of fluoride for their child. Methods: This was a mixed methods study of 56 caregivers hesitant about professionally applied topical fluoride for their child recruited from the University of Washington Center for Paediatric Dentistry and Seattle Children's Hospital's Odessa Brown Children's Dental Clinic. A 32‐item semi‐structured interview script was piloted and finalized. One‐time interviews with caregivers were conducted by phone in 2019. Associations between hesitancy of topical fluoride, fluoridated water and toothpaste were assessed quantitatively via two‐tailed chi‐squared tests. Qualitative data were coded using an inductive approach and content analytic methods to investigate reasons for hesitancy. Results: There were significant associations between hesitancy in all three pairwise comparisons of fluoride form (p <.01). Similar proportions of caregivers strongly or somewhat opposed fluoridated water compared with toothpaste (75% and 65%, respectively), but four times as many caregivers strongly or somewhat favoured fluoridated toothpaste compared to water for their child (25% and 7%, respectively). Concerns about harm were the most common reason caregivers opposed both fluoridated water and toothpaste. However, fluoride‐hesitant caregivers reported being more comfortable with fluoridated toothpaste because amount and frequency can be controlled, and ingestion can be prevented. Conclusions: Professionally applied topical fluoride hesitancy is significantly associated with fluoridated water and toothpaste hesitancy, but caregivers who were hesitant about topical fluoride was more comfortable with fluoridated toothpaste than fluoridated water for their child. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]