Abstract
Background: Sedated children’s prevention needs have not been fully ascertained nor has the parental view been sought. King’s College Hospital performs approximately 1283 sedations yearly and is one of the largest UK centres.
Aim: To explore the preventive experience of parents of sedated children and to seek their views on prevention delivery.
Methods: Prospective study using quantitative and qualitative methodology on a convenience sample of parents of sedated children.
Results: From 123 parents: 60 of their children had N2O inhalation sedation; regarding midazolam, 37 had oral and 26 had intravenous. Children were aged mean 8.5 years (2-16) this varied by sedation type (p< .001); 41.5% were boys; 71% were referred due to caries; 50% were anxious and 65% had experienced pain previously. Only 15% of caries referral parents had been offered fluoride varnish or 15% fissure sealants. Overall, the majority thought leaflets (83%), health professionals’ advice (79%), and internet websites (73%) could be informative and they supported school-based (79%) and hospital prevention programmes (73%). Suggestions:- ‘I think someone who knows about teeth should visit with health visitors’. Obstacles:- (i) availability of sugars ‘Sugars are everywhere’; (ii) lack of oral-health awareness ‘I wasn’t informed of all of this before. I knew all about it after my kid’s teeth got rotten’, and (iii) parenting challenges ‘I couldn’t tell her ‘NO’ when she asked for the bottle at night’.
Conclusions: The majority of sedated children were high caries risk; their parents request more support and better access to prevention information and treatment.
Aim: To explore the preventive experience of parents of sedated children and to seek their views on prevention delivery.
Methods: Prospective study using quantitative and qualitative methodology on a convenience sample of parents of sedated children.
Results: From 123 parents: 60 of their children had N2O inhalation sedation; regarding midazolam, 37 had oral and 26 had intravenous. Children were aged mean 8.5 years (2-16) this varied by sedation type (p< .001); 41.5% were boys; 71% were referred due to caries; 50% were anxious and 65% had experienced pain previously. Only 15% of caries referral parents had been offered fluoride varnish or 15% fissure sealants. Overall, the majority thought leaflets (83%), health professionals’ advice (79%), and internet websites (73%) could be informative and they supported school-based (79%) and hospital prevention programmes (73%). Suggestions:- ‘I think someone who knows about teeth should visit with health visitors’. Obstacles:- (i) availability of sugars ‘Sugars are everywhere’; (ii) lack of oral-health awareness ‘I wasn’t informed of all of this before. I knew all about it after my kid’s teeth got rotten’, and (iii) parenting challenges ‘I couldn’t tell her ‘NO’ when she asked for the bottle at night’.
Conclusions: The majority of sedated children were high caries risk; their parents request more support and better access to prevention information and treatment.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry |
| Publication status | Published - 2013 |