The purpose of this study was to gather information on the oral hygiene behaviour among the visually impaired adolescents. Interview and observation methods were used to collect data. A total of 114 visually impaired adolescents were interviewed and 10 of the interviewees were selected for observation on the actual oral hygiene practices. The mean age of the sample was 16 years old. The sample comprised of 53.5% female, majority were Malays (86.8%) and most of them were from the lower income group. Fifty four percent of the sample had low vision and 45.6% were blind. All of the participants reported that they brushed their teeth daily and most of them brushed twice a day or more. Flossing (6.1%) was not common practice among this group. It was observed that they encountered some difficulties, especially when putting the toothpaste on the toothbrush and also the way that they brushed their teeth could cause detrimental effect to the oral cavity. Thus, they need to be taught on proper oral hygiene care so that they can practice safe oral hygiene care and maintain their own oral health.

Aim: To assess the oral health related quality of life(OHQoL) of a selected population of Malaysian adults andto compare the OHQoL by periodontal status. Material& Methods: This cross-sectional study comprises aconvenient sampling of fifty subjects from the PrimaryCare Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya.OHQoL was assessed using the Malaysian versionof Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14). Basicperiodontal examination (BPE) was performed on allsubjects to determine their periodontal status. Descriptivestatistics and bivariate analysis were performed. Results:Psychological discomfort, physical pain and psychologicaldisability domains were the most affected dimensions inthis population. Subjects with income levels >RM2,500had higher impacts on their OHQoL as compared to thosefrom other income levels (p<0.05). 78% of the subjectshad some form of periodontitis (BPE scores 3 or 4) withthe other 22% recording healthy/ gingivitis status (BPE0, 1 or 2). Subjects with periodontitis experienced higherimpacts on OHQoL as compared to those with healthy/gingivitis in nearly all domains (p>0.05). Conclusion:Subjects with high income levels had high impacts ontheir OHQoL. Those with periodontitis experiencedhigher impacts on their OHQoL as compared to those whohad a healthy periodontium or gingivitis and affected awide range of domains of quality of life.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the awareness of periodontal disease and level of knowledgeof the relationship between smoking and periodontal disease amongst subjects who were smokersverses non-smokers. Methods: A questionnaire looking at knowledge of respondents regardinggum disease and knowledge and awareness about oral impacts of smoking on periodontal diseasewas developed and pretested in Dental Faculty University of Malaya. Basic Periodontal Examination(BPE) index was used to assess periodontal status. Results: The questionnaire was answered by130 subjects. Prevalence of smoking was 14.6%. A total of 58.6% non-smokers and 57.9% smokersknew about periodontal disease. However, only 26.1% non-smokers and 10.5% smokers knew thatthe cause for periodontal disease was plaque. More non-smokers than smokers knew that smokingaffected periodontal health (80.2% and 68.4% respectively) (p>0.05) and tooth mobility was an effect ofsmoking on periodontal health (27.0% and 0%) (p<0.05). Regarding source of information on effect ofsmoking on periodontal health, 63.2% smokers and 63.1% non-smokers reported obtaining informationthrough the mass media. However, only 31.6% smokers and 28.8% non-smokers were informed bytheir dentist. Conclusion: The awareness of periodontal disease and knowledge of the relationshipbetween smoking and periodontal disease was low in this selected population of smokers and nonsmokers.

Objective: To explore the association between socialsupport and stress levels in preclinical and clinical dentalstudents in Malaysia. Method: A cross sectional surveyof dental undergraduate students was conducted at theFaculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, UniversitiKebangsaan Malaysia and Universiti Sains Malaysia.Stress was measured using the Dental Environment Stress(DES) questionnaire. A DES-32 item was used to measurestress for the clinical students and DES-16 item for thepreclinical students. Four questions were used to measuresocial support. The total stress scores were standardizedfor comparison purposes. Results: A total of 357 (79.7%)preclinical and 417 (71.8%) clinical undergraduate dentalstudents responded to the questionnaires. The clinicalstudents experienced higher stress [mean standardizedDES score = 72.63, SD = 10.64] than preclinical students[mean standardized DES score = 70.19, SD=12.01]. Thetwo most stressful items reported by preclinical studentswere “fear of failing” and “examination and grades”.Among clinical students, the two most stressful items relatedto academic were “completing course requirement” and“fear of failing course” and items related to clinical sessionwere “fear of being barred due to the clinical schedule”and “patients late or absent”. Multiple regression analysesrevealed that low stress levels among preclinical studentswere significantly associated to a lot of contact withstudents of the same course. Conclusion: To some extent,social support does play a role in explaining differences inperceived stress, in particular among preclinical students.