Results – An epidemiological study was conducted to evaluate the oral health status of prisoners

Results –
An epidemiological study was conducted to evaluate the oral health status of prisoners, adverse oral habits and to identify oral hygiene stats of prisoners of central jail Jodhpur, who have been imprisoned for more than 3 months. The study was carried out on 981 prisoners of central jail and the following findings were revealed.

Graph 1: Distribution of prisoners of central jail according to their Age

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Graph 1- Shows age wise distribution of prisoners and it has been found that 391 (39.9%) of prisoners belong to age group between 15-30, and maximum of 549 (56 %) of the prisoners belong to age group between 31-60 years, only 41 (4.1%) of prisoners were in age group 60 and above.

Graph 2: Distribution of prisoners of central jail according to their Gender

Graph 2: Shows gender-wise distribution of prisoners and it dipicts that males are more in number 856 (87%) than females which are 125(12.7%).

Graph 3: Distribution of prisoners of central jail according to their Duration of Stay in the jail

Graph 3 reveals the distribution of prisoners regarding duration of stay in jail and we found that 224 (22.9%) prisoners were imprisoned from 1 month to 1 year, maximum of 256(26.1%) of prisoners have been imprisoned from 1-3 years, 220 (22.5%) were imprisoned from 4-6 years, 136 (13.9%) from duration of 7-9 years 68 (6.9%) for duration of 10-12 years and minimum of 3.2% of prisoners have been imprisoned since 16 years and above .

Table 2: Distribution of prisoners of central jail according to their oral hygiene practice

Oral hygiene practice
No. of prisoners (n) Percentage (%)
Type
Toothbrush + Toothpaste
Toothbrush + Toothpowder
Finger + Toothpaste
Finger + Toothpowder
Indegenous means
No Brushing
558
19
149
99
106
49
56.9%
2%
15.2%
10%
10.9%
5.0 %
Frequency of Brushing
Never
Once
Twice
146
817
17

14.9 %
83.4 %
1.7 %

n- Number of patients in a particular category
Table -2 shows the distribution of prisoners according to their oral hygiene practice and it has been seen that 558 (56.9%) of prisoners brushes their teeth with tooth brush and tooth paste, whereas 19(2%) uses tooth brush and tooth powder for cleaning of teeth, 149.1 (15.2%) of subjects uses finger and toothpaste and 98 (10%) of subjects use finger and toothpowder whereas there were 49(5%) prisoners who never brushed their teeths.
Related to frequency of brushing it is seen that 146 (14.9%) of prisoners never brushes their teeth where as 817(83%) of prisoners brushes their teeth just once in a day and 17 (1.7%) of prisoners brushes twice a day.

Table 3: Distribution of prisoners of central jail according to their Adverse Oral Habits
Adverse Oral Habits
No. of prisoners (n) Percentage (%)

No Smoking
Smoking
Smokeless
Both

368
244
191
177

37.6 %
24.9 %
19.5 %
18.1 %
n- Number of patients in a particular category
Table-3 is showing distribution of prisoners according to adverse oral habits and the following findings are dipicted showing that 368 (37.6 %) prisoners are non tobacco users whereas 244 (24.9%) are using tobacco in the form of smoking and 191(19.5%) of prisoners consume tobacco in smokeless form and 177(18.1%) of prisoners consume tobacco in both smokeless and smoking form.
.

Table -4 distribution of prisoners according to prosthetic conditions
Prosthetic Status
Upper
No prosthesis
Bridge (one unit )
More than one bridge
Partial denture
Both bridge(s) and partial denture(s)
Full removable denture
Not recorded
Lower
No prosthesis
Bridge(one unit)
More than one bridge
Partial denture
Both bridge(s) and partial denture(s)
Full removable denture
Not recorded

949
16
09
03
02
00
01

949
11
10
05
04
00
01

96.8 %
1.6 %
0.9%
0.3 %
0.2 %
0.0 %
0.1 %

96.8 %
1.1 %
1.0 %
0.5 %
0.4 %
0 %
0.1 %
Prosthetic Need
Upper
No prosthesis needed
Need for one unit prosthesis
Need for multi unit prosthesis
Need for combination of one / multi unit prosthesis
Need for full prosthesis
Not recorded
Lower
No prosthesis needed
Need for one unit prosthesis
Need for multi unit prosthesis
Need for combination of one / multi unit prosthesis
Need for full prosthesis
Not recorded

616 516
154 254
170
24
09
06

674 574
95 195
174
18
13
06

63.3 % 53.3%
15.5 %25.5%
17%
2.4 %
0.9 %
0.6 %

69.9 % 59.9%
9.7 % 19.7%
17.6 %
1.8 %
1.3 %
0.6 %
Table 4 – Showing prosthetic conditions of the prisoners revealing that in prosthetic status its seen that only 16 (1.6%) of prisoners were having one unit bridge in upper jaw, 9(0.9%) prisoners were having more than 1 bridge while 3(0.3%) were having partial denture and 2 (0.2%) were having both partial and bridge in the upper jaw whwereas in lower jaw it was seen that only 11 (1.1%) of prisoners were having single unit bridge ,while 10 (1%) were having bridge more than 1 unit,also 5(0.5%) were having partial denture and 4(0.4%) were having both partial denture and bridge .
Among prosthetic needs it was seen that 616 (63.3 %) of prisoners needed one unit prosthesis, 170(17.1%) of prisoners needs multi-unit prosthesis,while 24(2.4%) needed combination of one /multiunit prosthesis and 9 (0.9%) of prisoners needed full prosthesis in upper jaw whereas in lower jaw 674(69.9 %) of prisoners need one unit prosthesis , 174(17.6%) of prisoners needed multi unit prosthesis and 13(1.3%) of prisoners needed full prosthesis

TABLE 5 : Relation between age and oral health status of prisoners
Oral Health Status N Mean S.D. F value p- Value Significance
Prosthetic Status Upper
15-30 Years 391 0.023 0.289 2.876 0.057 Significant
31-60 Years
549
0.078 0.404
61 and above 40 0.100 0.496
Prosthetic Status Lower 15-30 Years 391 0.040 0.283 1.353 0.259 Non
Significant
31-60 Years
549
0.087 0.505
61 and above 40 0.075 0.474
Prosthetic Needs Upper
15-30 Years 391 0.235 0.892 7.357 0.001

Significant
31-60 Years
549
0.398 0.925
61 and above 40 0.750 1.372
Prosthetic Needs Lower 15-30 Years 391 0.301 0.844 6.133 0.002

Significant
31-60 Years
549
0.426 0.943
61 and above 40 0.800 1.324

(One-Way ANOVA test) (p ? 0.05 – Significant, CI = 95 %)
Table 5 shows relationship between age groups and oral health status of prisoners using one way ANOVA analysis
The results suggests that among prisoners there was significant relationship between their age groups and oral hygiene status (F=2.936, p=0.054,S) ,CPI (F=10.071, p=0.000,S), LOA (F=10.022, p=0.000,S), Dental Caries status (F=6.011, p=0.003,S), Prosthetic status of upper quadrant (F=2.876, p=0.057,S) and also there was a significant relationship between the age groups and prosthetic needs in the upper quadrant ( F=7.357, p=0.001,S) and in the lower quadrant ( F=6.133, p=0.002,S).
TABLE 6 : Relation between Duration of Stay and oral health status of prisoners
(One-Way ANOVA test)

Oral Health Status N Mean S.D. F value p- Value Significance
Prosthetic Status Upper 980 0.057 0.368 0.102 0.998
Non Significant
Prosthetic Status Lower 980 0.068 0.429 0.167 0.992
Non
Significant
Prosthetic Needs Upper 980 0.348 0.940 0.852 0.545
Non
Significant
Prosthetic Needs Lower 980 0.391 0.929 1.077 0.376
Non
Significant

(p ? 0.05 – Significant, CI = 95 %)
Graph 4: Relationship between duration of stay and oral health status among prisoners of central jail

TABLE 6 graph 4 Shows the relation between duration of Stay and oral health status of prisoners by using One-Way ANOVA analysis
The results suggests that among the prisoners there was a significant relationship between duration of stay and Oral Mucosal Condition ( F =2.110, P=0.040) ,OHI-S (F=0.026,P= 2.282 )
There was no association seen among the prisoners between duration of stay and TMJ, extra oral conditions, CPI, LOA, DMFT, prosthetic status lower prosthetic status upper, prosthetic needs upper , and prosthetic needs lower .
Oral Health Status N Mean S.D. F value p- Value Significance
Prosthetic Status Upper 980 0.057 0.368 3.782 0.010
Significant
Prosthetic Status Lower 980 0.068 0.429 1.511 0.210
Non Significant
Prosthetic Needs Upper 980 0.348 0.940 6.316 0.000
Significant
Prosthetic Needs Lower 980 0.391 0.929 4.318 0.005
Significant
TABLE 7 : Relation between Adverse Habits and oral health status of prisoners
(One-Way ANOVA test)

(p ? 0.05 – Significant, CI = 95 %)

TABLE 7 Shows the Relation between Adverse Habits and oral health status of prisoners using using One-Way ANOVA analysis
From the results it was found that a significant relationship among the prisoners was seen between adverse oral habits with TMJ ( F=11.361, P=0.000), Oral Mucosal Condition (F=17.833,P=0.000), OHI-S(F= 39.986,P=0.000), Prosthetic Needs Lower( F=2.787,P= 0.040)
There was no association seen among the prisoners between adverse oral habits with CPI, LOA, DMFT, prosthetic status lower, prosthetic status upper, prosthetic needs upper .

TABLE 8: Relation between Oral hygiene practices and oral health status of prisoners
Oral Health Status N Mean S.D. F value p- Value Significance
Prosthetic Status Upper 980 0.057 0.369 2.368 0.028
Significant
Prosthetic Status Lower 980 0.068 0.430 2.966 0.007
Significant
Prosthetic Needs Upper 980 0.349 0.941 10.086 0.000
Significant
Prosthetic Needs Lower 980 0.393 0.930 14.108 0.000
Significant
(One-Way ANOVA test) (p ? 0.05 – Significant, CI = 95 %)
TABLE 8 shows the Relationship between Oral hygiene practices and oral health status of prisoners by using One-Way ANOVA analysis
The results suggests that oral hygiene practice among the prisoners was in a significant relationhip with abnormalities of TMJ( F=5.65, P=0.000), Oral Mucosal Condition (F=3.153, P = 0.005), OHI-S (F =8.474,P= 0.000), CPI (F=3.494, P=0.002), LOA (F=9.075, P= 0.000), DMFT (F=14.135,P=0.000), Prosthetic Status Upper (F=2.368, P= 0.028), Prosthetic Status Lower (F=2.966,P=0.007), Prosthetic Needs Upper (F=10.086,P=0.000),), Prosthetic Needs Lower (F=5.293,P= 0.000),
There was no significant association found between oral hygiene practice among the prisoners and extra oral conditions

x

Hi!
I'm Mia

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out