치과의원 환자의 구강위생용품에 대한 인지도, 용도이해 및 사용실태에 관한 연구

박정순; 김영임; 장선희

추천

검색

자료유형: 학술저널

저자정보: 박정순 김영임 장선희

저널정보: 한국치위생학회 한국치위생학회지 한국치위생학회지 제9권 제4호

발행연도: 2009.1

수록면: 685 - 698 (14page)

이용수

📌

연구주제

📖

연구배경

🔬

연구방법

🏆

연구결과

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기

Objectives : This study was to examine the recognition and understanding of the use, application of oral hygiene supplies among dental clinic patients in a bid to stress the necessity of education on the right awareness and use of oral hygiene supplies, to provide information on the development of educational programs and ultimately to help promote the oral health of people in general. Methods : The subjects in this study were 314 patients who visited dental clinics in North Jeolla Province in June 2009. Results : 1. Out of oral hygiene supplies, the largest number of the patients investigated(74.6%) were best cognizant of dental floss, and the greatest group(77.7%) had the right understanding of the use of toothpick. Currently, the oral hygiene supplies that were most widely in use were toothpicks( 43.2%). 2. As to the relationship of awareness and understanding of the use, application of oral hygiene supplies to subjective oral health status, 50.0 percent of the patients who understood the use of toothpick found themselves to be in good health, and the gaps between them and the others were statistically significant. Among those who were aware of dental floss, the largest group(51.4%) considered themselves to be in good shape, and in the event of those who understood the use of dental floss, the greatest group(49.2%) deemed themselves to be in good health. Out of those who understood the use of mouse rinse, the largest group(53.7%) thought they were in good health(p<0.05). 3. Recognition of interdental brush, understanding of its use and whether to use it currently or not were identified as parents to use oral hygiene supplies recommended by dental clinics(p<0.05). 4. Recognition of interdental brush, understanding of its use and whether to use it currently or not were identified as patients to use oral hygiene supplies recommended by dental clinics(p<0.05). 5. The largest group of those who didn't put dental floss to use didn't use it for other reasons unspecified in the questionnaire, and the second greatest group of them didn't use it since it was so onerous to do that. There were statistically significant differences in the reason why they didn't use the oral hygiene supplies(p<0.05). 6. Awareness of dental floss and interdental brush, understanding of the use of the two and whether to use the two at present or not made statistically significant differences to whether they were likely to use the oral hygiene supplies in the future. And whether they were likely to use the oral hygiene supplies in the future was statistically significantly different according to awareness of mouse rinse and understanding of the use of it as well(p<0.05). Conclusions : Dental hygienists have to provide patients with various data of oral hygiene devices through oral health education and then only patients caring in dental clinics can choose the appropriate devices to claim for their own disease.

Objectives : This study was to examine the recognition and understanding of the use, application of oral hygiene supplies among dental clinic patients in a bid to stress the necessity of education on the right awareness and use of oral hygiene supplies, to provide information on the development of educational programs and ultimately to help promote the oral health of people in general. Methods : The subjects in this study were 314 patients who visited dental clinics in North Jeolla Province in June 2009. Results : 1. Out of oral hygiene supplies, the largest number of the patients investigated(74.6%) were best cognizant of dental floss, and the greatest group(77.7%) had the right understanding of the use of toothpick. Currently, the oral hygiene supplies that were most widely in use were toothpicks( 43.2%). 2. As to the relationship of awareness and understanding of the use, application of oral hygiene supplies to subjective oral health status, 50.0 percent of the patients who understood the use of toothpick found themselves to be in good health, and the gaps between them and the others were statistically significant. Among those who were aware of dental floss, the largest group(51.4%) considered themselves to be in good shape, and in the event of those who understood the use of dental floss, the greatest group(49.2%) deemed themselves to be in good health. Out of those who understood the use of mouse rinse, the largest group(53.7%) thought they were in good health(p<0.05). 3. Recognition of interdental brush, understanding of its use and whether to use it currently or not were identified as parents to use oral hygiene supplies recommended by dental clinics(p<0.05). 4. Recognition of interdental brush, understanding of its use and whether to use it currently or not were identified as patients to use oral hygiene supplies recommended by dental clinics(p<0.05). 5. The largest group of those who didn't put dental floss to use didn't use it for other reasons unspecified in the questionnaire, and the second greatest group of them didn't use it since it was so onerous to do that. There were statistically significant differences in the reason why they didn't use the oral hygiene supplies(p<0.05). 6. Awareness of dental floss and interdental brush, understanding of the use of the two and whether to use the two at present or not made statistically significant differences to whether they were likely to use the oral hygiene supplies in the future. And whether they were likely to use the oral hygiene supplies in the future was statistically significantly different according to awareness of mouse rinse and understanding of the use of it as well(p<0.05). Conclusions : Dental hygienists have to provide patients with various data of oral hygiene devices through oral health education and then only patients caring in dental clinics can choose the appropriate devices to claim for their own disease.

#구강위생용품 #인지도 #용도이해 #사용실태 #oral hygiene devices #recognition #understanding of the use #application

참고문헌 (19)

참고문헌 신청

Hassell TM / 1993 / Tissue and cells of the Periodontium / Periodontol 2000 3 : 9 ~ 38

Heins PJ / 1986 / A histologic study of the width and nature of inter-radicular space in human adult pre-molars and molar / J Dent Res 65 : 948 ~ 951

구경미 / 2008 / 구강보건교육학. 제2판 / 고문사 : 115 ~ 116

김명은 / 2008 / 일부 서비스 종사자들의 구강위생보조용품의 사용실태에 관한 조사 연구 / 한국치위생학회지 8 (3) : 37 ~ 52

김수경 / 2002 / 치과병·의원 내원환자의 구강위생용품에 대한 인지도 및 사용실태에 관한 연구 / 치위생과학회지 2 (2) : 95 ~ 103

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

박정순

소속기관 원광보건대학교

주요연구분야 의약학 > 임상의학 > 치의학

논문수 13 이용수 154

김영임

소속기관 한국치위생학회

주요연구분야 의약학 > 임상의학 > 치의학

논문수 13 이용수 73

장선희

소속기관 한국치위생학회

주요연구분야 의약학 > 임상의학 > 치의학

논문수 7 이용수 36

최근 본 자료

전체보기

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	원문	원문 PDF 파일
AI 학습용 데이터	원문 + 메타 (기본/상세)	원문 PDF 파일 및 서지정보 CSV
대량 구매용 데이터	B2B 구독 방식	특정 자료 한정으로 원문 접근 권한 부여
대량 구매용 데이터	URL 전달 방식	바로 PDF 뷰어를 열람할 수 있는 URL 제공

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	기본 메타	발행기관명, 간행물명, 권호명, 권(vol), 호(issue), 통권, 발행연도, 발행월, 논문명, 저자명, 시작페이지, 종료페이지, 전체페이지, 상세페이지URL
상세 메타 데이터	발행기관 메타	발행기관 이명, 영문명, 창립연도, 홈페이지URL, 발행기관 소개
	간행물 메타	부제목, 간행물 유형, ISSN, ISBN, 최초발행연도, 폐간연도, 간행빈도, 발행주기, 등재사항, 이용수, 피인용수, 권호수, 논문수, 표지이미지
	논문 메타	작성 언어, 부제목, 대등제목, 목차, 키워드, 초록, 이미지, 참고문헌, 이용수, 피인용수, 논문활용도, DBpia통합주제분류, KDC분류, DDC분류, 한국연구재단분류, UCI, DOI
	저자 메타	소속기관, 소속부서, 직급, 연구분야, 연구키워드, 이용수, 피인용수, 저자 논문활용도

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
※ 결합형/맞춤형 메타 데이터는 신청 내용에 따라 다양하게 제공 가능
이용순위 정보	주제분야별 많이 이용된 논문	“인문학”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	이용기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“중고등학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	세부기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“서울대학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	키워드별 많이 이용된 논문	“Chat GPT”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
키워드 정보	많이 이용된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 이용된 키워드
	많이 발행된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 발행된 키워드
	많이 검색된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 검색된 키워드
	연구 트렌드 키워드	특정 키워드 연관 연구동향 분석 데이터 키워드

논문 기본 정보

초록· 키워드

AI 요약

연구주제

연구배경

연구방법

연구결과

주요내용

목차

참고문헌 (19)

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

댓글(0)