Usporedba oralnog statusa studenata četvrte godine različitih fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu

Svrha: Svrha istraživanja bila je usporediti oralni status studenata četvrte godine Stomatološkog fakulteta te studenata četvrte godine ostalih fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Ispitanici i postupci: Istraživanjem je bilo obuhvaćeno 78 studenata stomatologije i 78 njihovih kolega s ostalih fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Pregledi su obavljeni prema metodologiji i kriterijima SZO-a (WHO-a) stomatološkim zrcalom, a parodontološkom sondom Community periodontal index (CPI). Rezultati: Prosječna vrijednost KEP-indeksa svih ispitanika bila 7,97 (s.d.= 4,48), a bila je veća kod muškaraca negoli kod žena (p=0,043). Studenti stomatologije imali su prosječan KEP 6,96 (s.d.=4,82), a oni s ostalih fakulteta 8,97 (s.d.=3,88), sa statistički značajnom razlikom (p=0,005). Prosječan CPI statistički se značajno razlikovao (p=0.001) i kod studenata stomatologije je iznosio 1,91 (s.d.=2,40), a kod ostalih 2,99 (s.d.=2,23). Većina studenata ostalih fakulteta ( 66 %) treba, osim preventivnog tretmana, i konzervativno liječenje za razliku od studenata stomatologije od kojih 83 posto ne treba nikakvo liječenje ili treba samo preventivno. Zaključak: Premda je pojavnost karijesa, parodontnih bolesti i potreba za stomatološkim liječenjem niža kod studenata stomatologije, razmjerno visoka vrijednost KEP-a u objema skupinama ispitanika upućuje na nužnost boljeg preventivnog djelovanja u društvu. Zbog svijesti o oralnom zdravlju i preventivnim mjerama studenti stomatologije mogu biti pozitivan primjer kolegama s ostalih fakulteta.
Objectives: To compare oral status of the fourth-year students of the School of Dental Medicine, and other fourth year students from the University of Zagreb. Materials and methods: Research included 78 dental students and 78 students of other colleges of the University of Zagreb. A standard dental check-up was performed following the WHO‑prescribed methodology and criteria, and by using a dental mirror and community periodontal index (CPI) probe. Results: Mean DMFT of all examined subjects was 7.97 (s.d. = 4.48), with a higher value for males than females (p =0.043). The dental students had a mean DMFT of 6.96 (s.d. =4.82) and the non-dental students group DMFT of 8.97 (s.d. =3.88). This difference was statistically significant (p =0.005). Average CPI indices difference of the examined groups (dental students – 1.91, s.d. =2.40; non-dental students – 2.99, s.d. =2.23) was also statistically significant (p=0.001). The majority of non-dental students (66%) needed, in addition to preventive measures, a conservative dental treatment, in contrast to the dental-students group, where 83% required only preventive or no dental treatment at all. Conclusions: Although the incidence of dental caries, periodontal diseases and treatment need is lower in dental students, the relatively high value of DMFT indices in both groups indicates the need for better preventive measures. Due to an inherent increased awareness of oral health and preventive measures, the dental students could set a good example to their fellowstudents of other colleges.