In this critical review, we summarized the evidence on associations between individual/household income and oral health, between income inequality and oral health, and income-related inequalities in oral health. Meta-analyses of mainly cross-sectional studies confirm that low individual/household income is associated with oral cancer (odds ratio, 2.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.59–3.65), dental caries prevalence (prevalence ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.18–1.41), any caries experience (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.19–1.65), tooth loss (odds ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.48–1.86), and traumatic dental injuries (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65–0.89). Reviews also confirm qualitatively that low income is associated with periodontal disease and poor oral health–related quality of life. Limited evidence from the United States shows that psychosocial and behavioral explanations only partially explain associations between low individual/household income and oral health. Few country-level studies and a handful of subnational studies from the United States, Japan, and Brazil show associations between area-level income inequality and poor oral health. However, this evidence is conflicting given that the association between area-level income inequality and oral health outcomes varies considerably by contexts and by oral health outcomes. Evidence also shows cross-national variations in income-related inequalities in oral health outcomes of self-rated oral health, dental care, oral health–related quality of life, outcomes of dental caries, and outcomes of tooth loss. There is a lack of discussion in oral health literature about limitations of using income as a measure of social position. Future studies on the relationship between income and oral health can benefit substantially from recent theoretical and methodological advancements in social epidemiology that include application of an intersectionality framework, improvements in reporting of inequality, and causal modeling approaches. Theoretically well-informed studies that apply robust epidemiological methods are required to address knowledge gaps for designing relevant policy interventions to reduce income-related inequalities in oral health.

There are no prospective studies investigating the effects of sugar-related feeding practices on changes in dental caries from early childhood to young adulthood. The aim of this study was to assess whether sugar-related feeding practices affect dental caries between the ages of 6 and 18 y. This birth cohort study was initiated in 1993 in Pelotas, Brazil. There were 3 dental clinical assessments; at ages 6 y (n = 359), 12 y (n = 339), and 18 y (n = 307). Sugar-related feeding practices were assessed at ages 4, 15, and 18 y. Covariates included sex and life course variables, such as family income, breast-feeding, mother’s education, regularity of dental visit, and child’s toothbrushing habits. Group-based trajectory analysis was performed to characterize trajectories of time-varying independent variables that had at least 3 time points. We fitted a generalized linear mixed model assuming negative binomial distribution with log link function on 3-time repeated dental caries assessments. One in 5 participants was classified as “high” sugar consumers, and nearly 40% were “upward consumers.” “Low consumers” accounted for >40% of the sample. High and upward sugar consumers had higher dental caries prevalence and mean DMFT in all cohort waves when compared with low sugar consumers. Caries occurred at a relatively constant rate over the period of study, but in all sugar consumption groups, the increment of dental caries was slightly higher between ages 6 and 12 y than between 12 and 18 y. Adjusted analysis showed that dental caries increment ratio between ages 6 and 18 y was 20% and 66% higher in upward and high sugar consumer groups as compared with low consumers. The higher the sugar consumption along the life course, the higher the dental caries increment. Even the low level of sugar consumption was related to dental caries, despite the use of fluoride.

OBJETIVO: Analisar a perda dentária com base em estimativas do número médio de dentes perdidos, prevalência de ausência de dentição funcional e edentulismo em adolescentes, adultos e idosos brasileiros, comparando-a com resultados de 2003. MÉTODOS: Os dados referem-se à Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde Bucal (SBBrasil 2010): adolescentes de 15 a 19 anos (n = 5.445), adultos entre 35 e 44 anos (n = 9.779) e idosos entre 65 e 74 anos (n = 7.619). O número de dentes perdidos, a prevalência de indivíduos sem dentição funcional (< 21 dentes naturais) e de edentulismo (perda total dos dentes) foram estimados para cada grupo etário, capitais e macrorregiões brasileiras. Foram realizadas análises de regressão logística (perdas dentárias) e de Poisson (ausência de dentição funcional e edentulismo) multivariáveis para identificar fatores socioeconômicos e demográficos associados a cada desfecho. RESULTADOS: A prevalência de perdas dentárias entre adolescentes foi de 17,4% (38,9% em 2002-3), variando de 8,1% entre os estratos de maior renda a quase 30% entre os menos escolarizados. Entre adolescentes, as mulheres, pardos e pretos, os de menor renda e escolaridade apresentaram maiores prevalências de perdas. Ausência de dentição funcional ocorreu em aproximadamente ¼ dos adultos, sendo superior nas mulheres, nos pretos e pardos, nos de menor renda e escolaridade. A média de dentes perdidos em adultos declinou de 13,5 em 2002-3 para 7,4 em 2010. Mais da metade da população idosa é edêntula (similar em 2002-3); maiores prevalências de edentulismo em idosos foram observadas em mulheres, nos de menores renda e escolaridade. A média de dentes perdidos em adolescentes variou de 0,1 (Curitiba e Vitória) a 1,2 (interior da região Norte). Entre adultos, a menor média encontrada foi 4,2 (Vitória) e a maior 13,6 (Rio Branco). CONCLUSÕES: Houve importante redução nas perdas dentárias em adolescentes e adultos em comparação com dados de 2003, mas não entre os idosos. As perdas dentárias apresentam marcadas desigualdades sociais e regionais.

The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the associations among education, income and dietary pattern (DP) in children and adolescents from high, medium and low human development countries (HHDC, MHDC and LHDC, respectively). Observational studies that evaluated the association between family income or education with the DP are obtained through electronic database searches. Forty articles are selected for review. In HHDC, education is inversely associated with “unhealthy” DP and positively associated with “healthy” DP. In cross-sectional studies from HHDC, higher income is negatively associated with “unhealthy” DP. In MHDC, there is no association between the socioeconomic variables (SE) and the DPs, although, in some studies, the unhealthy diet is positively associated with SE. Only one study conducted in LHDC showed an inverse association between income/education with “unhealthy” DP and there is no association between the SE and “healthy” DP. In conclusion, children and adolescents living in HHDC with high parental education tend to have a healthier diet. In MHDC, although an unhealthy diet is found among the high-income and educated population, the associations are not clear. Additional research is needed to clarify the associations between income and education with “unhealthy” and “healthy” DPs in MHDC and LHDC.

Population-based health surveys are increasingly including self-reported oral health measures. However, their validity is frequently questioned. This study aimed to review the diagnostic validity of self-reported oral health measures - regarding periodontal conditions, number of remaining teeth and use and need of prostheses - and to present prototypes of oral health items to assess periodontal conditions. Papers published between 1991 and 2011 were identified through PubMed database. The sample profile, the sample size and the methods used in each study were analyzed, as well as the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the oral health items. Periodontists were contacted, using a standardized text, sent by e-mail, which asked them to provide self-reported items regarding periodontal conditions. We reviewed 19 studies; 13 assessed periodontal conditions; five, the number of remaining teeth and four, the use and need of prosthesis - some studies evaluated two or more conditions simultaneously. Five of the eight periodontists suggested questions to assess periodontal conditions. The maximum and the minimum sensitivity values to assess periodontal conditions, number of remaining teeth and use and need of prosthesis were 100 and 2%; 91 and 21%; 100 and 100%; respectively; the maximum and the minimum specificity values were 100 and 18%; 97 and 96%; 93 and 93%; respectively. In conclusion, there are acceptable sensitivity and specificity values for number of remaining teeth and use and need of prosthesis only. Finally, we consider there is the need for further studies in the national context, in order to assess the impact of the questions about self-reported oral health conditions in epidemiological analyses. Therefore, it will be possible to empirically verify if self-reported questions can be used in such studies.