Kindergarten oral health promotion program

Categories

Categories associated with best practice:

  • Community
  • Health Equity
  • Individual
  • Early Childhood (ages 3-5) icon
  • Education and literacy
  • French
  • Healthy child development
  • Oral Health
  • Oral Health
  • Oral Health
  • Oral Health
  • Oral Health
  • Oral Health
  • Personal health practices and coping skills
  • Social environments

Determinants of Health: Personal health practices and coping skills, Education, literacy and life-long learning, Social environments, Healthy child development

Overview

This kindergarten oral health promotion program has been set up to improve children’s environment to foster oral health. Specifically, the program is aimed at promoting tooth brushing among children from disadvantaged areas within kindergartens in Clermont-Ferrand, France. Oral health education sessions for parents are offered by l’Association CLCV (Consommation, Logement et Cadre de Vie). A travelling display of signs focusing on cavity prevention and dental care in young children has been prepared. Under the program, parents are invited to attend a session at the school. A dentist is available to answer questions. The parents receive an information packet on cavity prevention and dental care in children. Two successive health education sessions are given in each class. The sessions are facilitated by the class teacher, a dentist on temporary assignment, and odontology students. The sessions focus on teaching brushing technique and are organized in such a way that the children’s individual skills are developed. Each child receives a brushing kit that remains at the school. The sessions also provide training for the schoolteacher in how to supervise the students’ brushing sessions. The kindergarten tooth brushing program was evaluated one year after its implementation. The evaluation was based on the children’s biannual clinical examinations and the questionnaire administered to parents. Positive results were noted, including an increase in the mothers’ level of knowledge of oral health, as well as improved oral hygiene and the DMFT factor (number of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among children who had received the intervention. In fact, the test group’s average plague score at the end of the year was half that of the control group (Mann-Whitney, p < 0,0001). Similarly, at the start, 35% of the children were not brushing every day, as compared to 21% at the end of the year. However, the intervention had no impact on the seeking of dental care for the children.

Primary Source Document

S Tubert-Jeannin (Université d’Auvergne, Département de santé publique, Équipe d’Accueil 3847, UFR d’Odontologie, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France and CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, Centre de Soins Dentaires, Hôtel Dieu, F-63001 Clermont-Ferrand, France), M-M Lecuyer (Université d’Auvergne, Département de santé publique, Équipe d’Accueil 3847, UFR d’Odontologie, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France), R Manevy (Jeannin (Université d’Auvergne, Département de santé publique, Équipe d’Accueil 3847, UFR d’Odontologie, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France), E Pegon-Machat (Université d’Auvergne, Département de santé publique, Équipe d’Accueil 3847, UFR d’Odontologie, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France and CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, Centre de Soins Dentaires, Hôtel Dieu, F-63001 Clermont-Ferrand, France), B Decroll (Université d’Auvergne, Département de santé publique, Équipe d’Accueil 3847, UFR d’Odontologie, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France). , One-Year Evaluation of an Oral Hygiene Promotion Program in a Kindergarten Santé Publique 1/2008 (Vol. 20) : 7-17

Contact information of developer(s) and/or implementer(s)

Faculté de Chirurgie Dentaire de Clermont-Ferrand and Association Aide Odontologique Internationale

Intervention Focus

Intervention Goal / ObjectiveLevel(s) TargetedEquity Focus
Provide teachers with the necessary training to organize and supervise tooth brushing sessions in kindergarten.
  • Organizational level
People living in conditions of disadvantage are explicitly stated to be a target population of the intervention.
Improve parents’ knowledge of oral care and cavity prevention in children.
  • Interpersonal level
People living in conditions of disadvantage are explicitly stated to be a target population of the intervention.
Improve parents’ knowledge of good oral health practices in children.
  • Interpersonal level
People living in conditions of disadvantage are explicitly stated to be a target population of the intervention.
Promote oral health in kindergarteners.
  • Organizational level
People living in conditions of disadvantage are explicitly stated to be a target population of the intervention.
Promote supervised tooth brushing in kindergarten.
  • Organizational level
People living in conditions of disadvantage are explicitly stated to be a target population of the intervention.

Health Issue(s) that is/are addressed by the Intervention

Health Promotion

  • Oral Health Promotion
  • Oral HP Children/Youth
  • Oral HP Infants/Preschool
  • Oral HP Vulnerable Pop
  • Oral HP Integration
  • Oral HP Planning

Risk Reduction

    Specific Activities of the Intervention

    • Counselling sessions to those who are at high risk for a chronic disease
    • Educational health information offered
    • Information sessions offered about a risk factor or condition
    • Training offered to deliver the intervention
    • Group process/program
    • Partnership development
    • People living in conditions of disadvantage were included in decision-making processes.

    Priority/Target Population for Intervention Delivery

    Life Stage

    • Early childhood (age 3-5 years)

    Settings

    Educational Settings

    • Early learning environment (ages 0-5)

    Community Setting

      N/A

      Outcomes

      Outcomes and Impact Chart
      Level of ImpactDescription of OutcomeEquity Focus
      Individual LevelIn the test group, the number of deciduous teeth with caries [from 1.53 (2.67) to 1.18 (2.14), p = 0.006] and the DMTF factor [from 2.00 (3.49) to 1.94 (3.26), p = 0,044] both dropped between the two examinations. The number of filled teeth increased significantly [from 0.39 (1.33) to 0.67 (1.62), p < 0.0001]. In the control group, only a significant increase in the number of filled teeth was observed.Outcomes are reported for people living in conditions of disadvantage, and are not compared to people living in more advantaged conditions.
      Individual LevelParents’ knowledge of toothpaste fluoridation increased (n = 102, Mac Nemar, p < 0.0001). At the outset, 28% of parents did not know that toothpaste usually contains fluoride, compared to only 9% by year’s end.Outcomes are reported for people living in conditions of disadvantage, and are not compared to people living in more advantaged conditions.
      Individual LevelBrushing frequency increased (n = 111, Mac Nemar, p < 0.0001). At the outset, 35% of children did not brush their teeth daily, compared to 21% at the end of the year. Outcomes are reported for people living in conditions of disadvantage, and are not compared to people living in more advantaged conditions.
      Individual LevelThe plaque score dropped significantly in the test group (Wilcoxon-paired series, p < 0.0001), while it remained unchanged in the control group (Wilcoxon-paired series, p > 0.05). The average end-of-year plaque score in the test group was half that of the control group (Mann-Whitney, p < 0.0001). Outcomes are reported for people living in conditions of disadvantage, and are not compared to people living in more advantaged conditions.
      Community Level

      The intervention had no impact on parent’s knowledge of dental care needs and access:

      • 15% of parents in the test group did not know whether their child needed care following the first examination
      • 14% of parents of children with tooth decay at the first examination felt that their child did not need care
      • Approximately 2/3 of the families did not consult a dentist following the screening

      Outcomes are reported for people living in conditions of disadvantage, and are not compared to people living in more advantaged conditions.

      Adaptability

      Implementation History

      • Implemented once (could be a pilot) - The intervention has been implemented once and is theoretically replicable elsewhere.

      Expertise Required for Implementation within the Context of the Intervention

      • Specialized skills training provided as part of the Intervention - The intervention does not require individuals or groups with highly specialized training, but requires that individuals or groups be trained as part of the implementation of the intervention.

      Are there supports available for implementation

      Yes. funding, volunteer dentists and students

      Are there resources and/or products associated with the interventions

      Yes. Travelling exhibit with posters on cavity prevention and dental care in young children; information package on cavity prevention and dental care in children; and brushing kit for children.