Purpose: This study investigated the attitude of patients, grouped by the Brinkman index, towards smoking by using the Kano Test for Social Nicotine Dependence (KTSND) and their knowledge of peri-implantitis. Methods:...Purpose: This study investigated the attitude of patients, grouped by the Brinkman index, towards smoking by using the Kano Test for Social Nicotine Dependence (KTSND) and their knowledge of peri-implantitis. Methods: The participants were 3093 new patients who visited the Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital from January 2012 to December 2013 for an oral implant. The methodology included a questionnaire about sex, age, smoking status, daily average number of cigarettes, years of smoking, knowledge of peri-implantitis, and the KTSND. The patients were grouped according to their smoking status by calculating their Brinkman index (over 200 or not): current smokers with the possibility of nicotine dependence (BI(+)CS), current smokers with no possibility of nicotine dependence (BI(-)CS), ex-smokers (ES), and non-smokers (NS). The Brinkman index is obtained by multiplying one’s daily average number of cigarettes by the number of years they have been smoking. Results: Data were collected from 2182 respondents (response rate = 71%). The KTSND scores of BI(+)CS (16.89 ± 4.26) were significantly higher than the scores of ES (11.99 ± 4.52) and NS (11.53 ± 5.01). In current smokers, there were no significant differences between BI(+)CS and BI(-)CS. The patients replied “I don’t know” about peri-implantitis most often in all groups;however, there were no significant differences between the groups. Discussion: BI(+)CS were more dependent on nicotine in social situations than the other groups were. In Japan, a Brinkman index over 200 is required for a nicotine-dependence management fee to be instituted for health insurance treatment. This is a major concern for young smokers, who may be excluded from treatment because their years of smoking are substantially less. Results revealed that there were no significant differences between BI(+)CS and BI(-)CS. Therefore, it was suggested that the Brinkman index did not sufficiently group the participants.展开更多
文摘Purpose: This study investigated the attitude of patients, grouped by the Brinkman index, towards smoking by using the Kano Test for Social Nicotine Dependence (KTSND) and their knowledge of peri-implantitis. Methods: The participants were 3093 new patients who visited the Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital from January 2012 to December 2013 for an oral implant. The methodology included a questionnaire about sex, age, smoking status, daily average number of cigarettes, years of smoking, knowledge of peri-implantitis, and the KTSND. The patients were grouped according to their smoking status by calculating their Brinkman index (over 200 or not): current smokers with the possibility of nicotine dependence (BI(+)CS), current smokers with no possibility of nicotine dependence (BI(-)CS), ex-smokers (ES), and non-smokers (NS). The Brinkman index is obtained by multiplying one’s daily average number of cigarettes by the number of years they have been smoking. Results: Data were collected from 2182 respondents (response rate = 71%). The KTSND scores of BI(+)CS (16.89 ± 4.26) were significantly higher than the scores of ES (11.99 ± 4.52) and NS (11.53 ± 5.01). In current smokers, there were no significant differences between BI(+)CS and BI(-)CS. The patients replied “I don’t know” about peri-implantitis most often in all groups;however, there were no significant differences between the groups. Discussion: BI(+)CS were more dependent on nicotine in social situations than the other groups were. In Japan, a Brinkman index over 200 is required for a nicotine-dependence management fee to be instituted for health insurance treatment. This is a major concern for young smokers, who may be excluded from treatment because their years of smoking are substantially less. Results revealed that there were no significant differences between BI(+)CS and BI(-)CS. Therefore, it was suggested that the Brinkman index did not sufficiently group the participants.
