Lee GKY, Tan MN, Gao X, Wee HL, Lai BWP, Hong CHL, Hu S. Acceptance of silver diamine fluoride use in community dwelling older adults, nursing home residents, and caregivers.
J Dent 2024;
141:104819. [PMID:
38128821 DOI:
10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104819]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2023] [Revised: 12/14/2023] [Accepted: 12/18/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
To compare the level of acceptance of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) treatment between different functional groups of older adults aged 65-years-old and above.
METHODS
Three groups were recruited representing functionally-independent ("Community dwelling"), frail ("Nursing home"), and functionally-dependent older adults ("Caregiver": proxy respondent involved in caring for an older adult of all functional levels). Participants viewed a video on SDF and an interviewer-led questionnaire collected demographics, dental experience and perception on SDF use.
RESULTS
The study recruited 201 participants (100 "Community dwelling", 51 "Nursing home", 50 "Caregiver"). Overall, 73 % of participants were accepting of SDF treatment. Those in the "Community dwelling" group were most accepting (85 %), followed by the "Nursing home" group (61 %) and "Caregiver" group (60 %) (p<0.001). Participants were more accepting of SDF use on posterior (73 %) compared to anterior teeth (46 %). They were more accepting when SDF was presented as a treatment to avoid infection and pain (87 %), and general anesthesia (78 %). In a regression analysis, "Nursing home" and "Caregiver" participants were three times less likely to accept SDF (OR 0.27 [95 % CI: 0.13 to 0.60], and OR 0.27 [95 % CI: 0.12 to 0.58] respectively) compared to "Community dwelling" participants. After adjusting for other factors, only the "Caregiver" group remained significant (Adjusted OR 0.32 [95 % CI: 0.13 to 0.78]).
CONCLUSIONS
Older adults were accepting of SDF and this treatment modality has the potential to be a routine treatment option in dental caries management in this population. However, this was less certain among frail and functionally dependent older adults.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
An SDF program to manage caries is likely to be well-received by functionally-independent older adults. However, the acceptance among frail and functionally-dependent older adults were lower even though SDF is mostly likely to benefit these populations. There is a need to investigate this relatively lower levels of acceptance.
Collapse