Parental acceptance of the utilization of silver diamine fluoride on their child’s primary and permanent teeth

Figures & data

Table 1 Sociodemographic characteristics of participating subjects (N=104)

Variable	N (%)
Child age (Years)
2–4	13 (12.5)
5–7	44 (42.3)
8–12	47 (45.19)
Male	59 (56.7)
Female	45 (43.3)
Parents
Mother	61 (58.7)
Father	43 (41.3)
Parental education
≤ High school	63 (60.6)
≥University and higher education	41 (39.4)
Family income
Low	31 (29.8)
Moderate	33 (31.7)
High	40 (38.4)
Cooperation during pervious dental treatment
Cooperative	68 (65.4)
Uncooperative	23 (22.1)
Do not know	13 (12.5)
History of pain
Yes	76 (73.1)
No	28 (27.0)

Table 2 Distribution of the most important treatment goal among participating parents (N=104)

Variable	Cosmetic N (%)	Pain N (%)	P-value, OR and 95% (CI)
Child gender
Male	15 (25.4)	44 (74.6)	0.909,1.054 (0.429–2.585)
Female	11 (24.4)	34 (75.6)
Parents
Mother	13 (21.3)	48 (78.7)	0.301,0.61 (0.256–1.528)
Father	13 (30.2)	30 (69.8)
Parents’ education
≤ High school	13 (20.6)	50 (79.4)	0.203, 0.56 (0.228–1.374)
≥University and higher education	13 (31.7)	28 (68.3)
Family income
Low*	5 (16.1)	26 (83.9)	0.828, 0.87 (0.235–3.186)
Moderate	6 (18.2)	27 (81.8)	0.053, 0.32 (0.1–1.01)
High	15 (37.5)	25 (62.5)
Cooperation during pervious dental treatment
Cooperative*	22 (32.4)	46 (67.6)	0.084, 3.19 (0.856–11.88)
Uncooperative	3 (13.0)	20 (87.0)
Do not know	1 (7.7)	12 (84.6)
History of pain
Yes	17 (22.4)	59 (77.6)	0.45, 0.608 (0.233–1.587)
No	9 (35.7)	19 (64.3)

Note: *Reference-comparison group.

Table 3 Distribution of the mean parental rating of acceptability of the staining associated with Silver diamine fluoride treatment according to the type and location of the teeth (N=104)

Location and teeth type	Strongly acceptable	Acceptable	Neutral	Not acceptable	Strongly not acceptable	Mean (±SD)	P-value
Primary anterior n (%)	17 (16.3)	20 (19.2)	5 (4.8)	19 (18.3)	43 (41.3)	3.49 (1.57)	P<0.001*
Permanent anterior n (%)	7 (6.7)	10 (9.6)	9 (8.7)	16 (15.9)	62 (59.6)	4.12 (1.274)
Primary posterior n (%)	33 (31.7)	37 (35.6)	6 (5.8)	9 (8.7)	19 (18.3)	2.46 (1.474)	P<0.001*
Permanent posterior n (%)	16 (15.4)	26 (25)	10 (9.6)	13 (12.5)	39 (37.5)	3.32 (1.553)
Primary anterior n (%)	17 (16.3)	20 (19.2)	5 (4.8)	19 (18.3)	43 (41.3)	3.49 (1.57)	P<0.001*
Primary posterior n (%)	33 (31.7)	37 (35.6)	6 (5.8)	9 (8.7)	19 (18.3)	2.46 (1.474)
Permanent anterior n (%)	7 (6.7)	10 (9.6)	9 (8.7)	16 (15.9)	62 (59.6)	4.12 (1.274)	P<0.001*
Permanent posterior n (%)	16 (15.4)	26 (25)	10 (9.6)	13 (12.5)	39 (37.5)	3.32 (1.553)

Notes: Scale ranging from (1=Strongly acceptable, 2=acceptable, 3=neutral, 4=not acceptable, and 5=strongly not acceptable).

Statistically significant*.

Table 4 The mean parental rating of acceptability of the staining associated with Silver diamine fluoride treatment according to child cooperation, teeth location, and type (N=104)

Parental acceptance	Cooperative	Mean (±SD)	P-value
Anterior primary	Yes	3.76 (1.5)	P=0.001*
	No	2.52 (1.47)
Posterior primary	Yes	2.78 (1.57)	P<0.001*
	No	1.48(0.67)
Anterior permanent	Yes	4.28 (1.26)	P=0.027*
	No	3.57 (1.47)
Posterior permanent	Yes	3.71 (1.53)	P<0.001*
	No	2.30 (1.36)

Notes: Scale ranging from (1=Strongly acceptable, 2=acceptable, 3=neutral, 4=not acceptable, and 5=strongly not acceptable).

Statistically significant *