World Health Organization global policy for improvement of oral health--World Health Assembly 2007

World Health Organization, Global Oral Health Programme, Department of Chronic Disease and Health Promotion, Geneva, Switzerland.
International Dental Journal (Impact Factor: 1.26). 06/2008; 58(3):115-21. DOI: 10.1111/j.1875-595X.2008.tb00185.x
Source: PubMed


The World Health Organization (WHO) Global Oral Health Programme has worked hard over the past five years to increase the awareness of oral health worldwide as an important component of general health and quality of life. Meanwhile, oral disease is still a major public health problem in high income countries and the burden of oral disease is growing in many low- and middle income countries. In the World Oral Health Report 2003, the WHO Global Oral Health Programme formulated the policies and the necessary actions for the improvement of oral health. The strategy is that oral disease prevention and the promotion of oral health needs to be integrated with chronic disease prevention and general health promotion as the risks to health are linked. The World Health Assembly (WHA) and the Executive Board (EB) are supreme governance bodies of WHO and for the first time in 25 years oral health was subject to discussion by those bodies in 2007. At the EB120 and WHA60, the Member States agreed on an action plan for oral health and integrated disease prevention, thereby confirming the approach of the Oral Health Programme. The policy forms the basis for future development or adjustment of oral health programmes at national level.

1 Follower
11 Reads
  • Source
    • "Dental flossing is the most commonly recommended adjunctive oral self-care method to prevent such diseases (Sambunjak et al., 2011). However, a large proportion of people floss their teeth less than recommended or not at all (Petersen, 2008). In India, there is lack of appropriate 30 oral health education even among literates, and flossing is not a well-known behavior (Kumar, 2012). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A sequential intervention to facilitate the adoption and maintenance of dental flossing was conducted among 205 students in India, aged 18-26 years. Two experimental groups received different treatment sequences and were observed at three assessment points, 34 days apart. One group received first a motivational intervention (intention, outcome expectancies, and risk perception, followed by a self-regulatory intervention (planning, self-efficacy, and action control). The second group received the same intervention in the opposite order. Both intervention sequences yielded gains in terms of flossing, planning, self-efficacy, and action control. However, at Time 2, those who had received the self-regulatory intervention first, were superior to their counterparts who had received the motivational intervention first. At Time 3, differences vanished as everyone had then received both interventions. Thus, findings highlight the benefits of a self-regulatory compared to a mere motivational intervention.
    Psychology Health and Medicine 08/2014; 20(4):1-12. DOI:10.1080/13548506.2014.951368 · 1.26 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Good oral health is necessary for individual’s well-being and is integral to good general health [1]. Oral disease is one of the major public health problems worldwide since it can affect anyone regardless of age, gender, ethnicity or social status and is among one of the most expensive to treat [2]. Although there has been a marked improvement in dental health in many developed countries, the prevalence of oral diseases is still increasing in some developing countries [3]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dentists are considered role models by the general population in regards to oral hygiene and oral health behavior. This study aimed to access the oral health status of dentists and laypersons, and compare the dentists' practice of preventive dentistry and oral self-care behaviors to that of the laypersons. This cross-sectional study recruited 472 participants (195 dentists and 277 laypersons from the general population). Their oral health/hygiene behavior was assessed using a standardized close-ended multiple choice questionnaire. Oral examination was performed to assess caries using Decayed Missed Filled teeth (DMFT) index and periodontal status using Community Periodontal Index of Treatment Needs (CPITN). Ninety-six percent of dentists brushed their teeth at least once daily, using fluoridated toothpaste and 80.5% twice daily. Although 94% of laypersons brushed their teeth once daily, they seldom used fluoridated toothpaste. Ten percent of participants in each group were caries free. The mean number of teeth present in the oral cavity (27.4 versus 25.4), mean number of teeth with caries (1.8 versus 3.7) and fillings (2.5 versus 0.4) were significantly different (p < 0.0001) between dentists and laypersons, respectively. Regarding the periodontal status, 82% of dentists had CPITN score of 0 whereas 71% of laypersons had the highest score 3 (p = 0.007), and 81% of the laypersons reported tooth mobility compared to 1% of dentists (p < 0.0001). The participating dentists had better periodontal status and better self-reported oral health behaviors than the laypersons. Despite similar prevalence of caries in the two groups, the prevalence of decayed and unfilled teeth was lower among the dentists.
    BMC Oral Health 03/2014; 14(1):23. DOI:10.1186/1472-6831-14-23 · 1.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Access to healthcare in general remains a major issue in many countries, even those with a universal health-care insurance scheme [8,12-15]. Several recent studies [8,15,16] focused on the use or coverage of dental services across a number of countries: the results have highlighted the improvement of dental care as an international priority. Such improvement can be facilitated by addressing the inequities in dental care both within and across countries. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: : Oral health is an important component of people's general health status. Many studies have shown that socioeconomic status is an important determinant of access to health services. In the present study, we explored the inequality and socioeconomic factors associated with people's non-use of dental care across Europe. We obtained data from the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions survey conducted by Eurostat in 2007. These cross-sectional data were collected from people aged 16 years and older in 24 European countries, except those living in long-term care facilities. The variable of interest was the prevalence of non-use of dental care while needed. We used the direct method of standardisation by age and sex to eliminate confounders in the data. Socioeconomic inequalities in the non-use of dental care were measured through differences in prevalence, the relative concentration index (RCI), and the relative index of inequality (RII). We compared the results among countries and conducted standard and multilevel logistic regression analyses to examine the socioeconomic factors associated with the non-use of dental care while needed. The results revealed significant socio-economic inequalities in the non-use of dental care across Europe, the magnitudes of which depended on the measure of inequality used. For example, inequalities in the prevalence of non-use among education levels according to the RCI ranged from 0.005 (in the United Kingdom) to -0.271 (Denmark) for men and from -0.009 (Poland) to 0.176 (Spain) for women, whereas the RII results ranged from 1.21 (Poland) to 11.50 (Slovakia) for men and from 1.62 (Poland) to 4.70 (Belgium) for women. Furthermore, the level-2 variance (random effects) was significantly different from zero, indicating the presence of heterogeneity in the probability of the non-use of needed dental care at the country level. Overall, our study revealed considerable socioeconomic inequalities in the non-use of dental care at both the individual (intra-country) and collective (inter-country) levels. Therefore, to be most effective, policies to reduce this social inequality across Europe should address both levels.
    International Journal for Equity in Health 01/2014; 13(1):7. DOI:10.1186/1475-9276-13-7 · 1.71 Impact Factor
Show more


11 Reads
Available from