Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Visually impaired individuals face significant challenges in maintaining oral hygiene due to reliance on visual cues. Conventional oral health education (OHE) often fails to address their needs, leading to disparities in oral health outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the effectiveness of three customized oral health education strategies-Audio only (Group 1), Audio + Braille (Group 2), and Audio + Tactile Model (Group 3)-on oral health Knowledge, Attitude, Practice (KAP), and clinical oral hygiene status among institutionalized visually impaired individuals in Lucknow, India.
Methods: A prospective cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted across two institutions, enrolling 180 visually impaired individuals aged ≥ 7 years. Of these, 15 were excluded based on eligibility criteria. The remaining 165 participants were randomly allocated into three intervention groups (55 participants per group). During follow-up, 5 participants from each group were lost, resulting in a final analysis of 150 participants (n = 50 per group). Each group received structured OHE via a designated modality, reinforced at 30, 60, and 90 days. Pre- and post-intervention assessments included Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) scores and clinical parameters-Debris Index (OHI-S) and Gingival Index (GI). Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA, Tukey's HSD, paired t-tests, one-way ANOVA, Chi-square tests, and Pearson's correlation.
Results: All groups showed significant improvement post-intervention (p < 0.001), with the Audio + Braille group achieving the greatest gains in knowledge (26%-100%), attitude/practice (36.5%-68.4%), and clinical outcomes (Debris Index: 2.23 to 0.43; GI: 1.09 to 0.22). Repeated measures ANOVA and post hoc analysis confirmed Group 2's superiority across all parameters. Strong inverse correlations between behavior scores and clinical indices emerged over time (r > -0.85), highlighting the impact of behavior change on oral health.
Conclusion: Multisensory OHE strategies, especially Audio + Braille, were most effective in improving oral health knowledge and hygiene status. Integration of such sensory-adapted educational models into public health programs may enhance oral health equity among visually impaired populations.
Trial Registration: CTRI/2024/10/093533.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/scd.70080 | DOI Listing |