Health disparities among highly vulnerable populations in the United States: a call to action for medical and oral health care

Healthcare in the United States (US) is burdened with enormous healthcare disparities associated with a variety of factors including insurance status, income, and race. Highly vulnerable populations, classified as those with complex medical problems and/or social needs, are one of the fastest growing segments within the US. Over a decade ago, the US Surgeon General publically challenged the nation to realize the importance of oral health and its relationship to general health and well-being, yet oral health disparities continue to plague the US healthcare system. Interprofessional education and teamwork has been demonstrated to improve patient outcomes and provide benefits to participating health professionals. We propose the implementation of interprofessional education and teamwork as a solution to meet the increasing oral and systemic healthcare demands of highly vulnerable US populations

Caregivers' oral health literacy and their young children's oral health-related quality-of-life

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of caregivers’ oral health literacy (OHL) with their children's oral health related-quality of life (C-OHRQoL) and explore literacy as a modifier in the association between children's oral health status (COHS) and C-OHRQoL. METHODS: We relied upon data from structured interviews with 203 caregivers of children ages 3-5 from the Carolina Oral Health Literacy (COHL) Project. Data were collected for OHL using REALD-30, caregiver-reported COHS using the NHANES-item, and COHRQoL using the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (ECOHIS). We also measured oral health behaviors (OHBs) and socio-demographic characteristics and calculated overall/stratified summary estimates for OHL and C-OHRQoL. We computed Spearman's rho and 95% confidence limits (CL) as measures of correlation of OHL/COHS with C-OHRQoL. To determine whether OHL modified the association between COHS and C-OHRQoL, we compared literacy-specific summary and regression estimates. RESULTS: Reported COHS was: excellent—50%, very good—28%, good—14%, fair—6%, poor—2%. The aggregate C-OHRQoL mean score was 2.0 (95% CL:1.4, 2.6), and the mean OHL score 15.9 (95% CL:15.2, 16.7). There was an inverse relationship between COHS and C-OHRQoL: rho=-0.32 (95% CL:-0.45, -0.18). There was no important association between OHL and C-OHRQoL; however, deleterious OHBs were associated with worse C-OHRQoL. Literacy-specific linear and Poisson regression estimates of the association between COHS and C-OHRQoL departed from homogeneity (Wald X(2) P<0.2). CONCLUSION: In this community-based sample of caregiver/child dyads, we found a strong correlation between OHS and C-OHRQoL. The association's magnitude and gradient were less pronounced among caregivers with low literacy