Assessment of Patients' Experience and Perception Toward Dentinal Hypersensitivity for Its Diagnosis and Management:...

Background Dentinal hypersensitivity (DH) is a common clinical finding that varies greatly in prevalence. An appropriate impulse that detonates noxious stimuli in the pulp/dentin boundary causes the typical DH pain, which is sudden, short, sharp, and of rapid onset. The objective of this research was to ascertain the incidence of DH in Keralites and evaluate some contributory factors, along with other initiating stimuli. Methodology Over three months, from June 2022 to August 2022, a cluster sampling technique was employed to conduct the study in 14 districts of Kerala. Patients from five clinics from each district who reported having DH and were aged 25 to 65 years were chosen at random. Using Google Survey forms, a 20-question, closed-ended survey was mailed to patients. The data were collected, evaluated, and analyzed using SPSS Version 23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). The statistical difference in the distribution of DH and the patient's age was determined using analysis of variance (ANOVA). A chi-square test was carried out to test the association between dentinal hypersensitivity, gender, and other parameters; P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results Among the 2,520 persons to whom questionnaires were mailed, 2,321 responded, with an unresponsive rate of 7.89%. The study revealed a sensitivity predilection among females (54%), although statistically insignificant. Respondents aged 25 to 35 years (41.01%) were commonly reported to have DH, the age distribution of which was found to be highly significant statistically (P < 0.01). Teeth whitening resulted in 82.98% of the sensitivity, whereas 47.99% accepted poor oral hygiene as an additional contributory factor. DH was reported in 52.01% of the patients with gastritis and 63.03% of the patients with gingival recession. Further, blame for poor dental treatment (88.88%) and climate change (82.92%) were also found relevant. The quality of life was claimed to be afflicted in 90.99% of the patients. Desensitizing agents were used by 68.97% of the patients, with which 68.03% reported satisfaction. Of the subjects who underwent professional treatment, 87.03% reported being satisfied. Oral prophylaxis-induced sensitivity was reported in 57.99%, indicating enhanced oral health awareness among Kerala residents. There was a statistically highly significant difference in the patient distribution based on the exposure to DH, and their perception of the causes and factors affecting DH (P < 0.01). Conclusions DH is a frequently and widely prevalent dental malady. Respondents demonstrated that they were conversant with DH. The quality of life and enjoyment of daily activities are both impacted by dentin hypersensitivity, and many patients are unaware that it is a treatable illness. Various desensitizing substances are also available and can be applied quickly to sensitive areas. Patients prefer this procedure as it is simpler to apply these agents and the effects are pleasant and beneficial.