Filetype PDF | Posted on 20 Sep 2022 | 4 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
276x Filetype PDF File size 0.46 MB Source: www.koreascience.or.kr
Original
Article
ISSN 2288-9272
JOMP J Oral Med Pain 2014;39(1):15-21
Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain http://dx.doi.org/10.14476/jomp.2014.39.1.15
Oral Hygiene Controllability and Personality Type Test (MBTI)
Hye Sook Park
Department of Dental Laboratory Technology, Shingu College, Seongnam, Korea
Received January 15, 2014 Purpose he purpose of this study was to investiate the relationship between personality type
Revised January 29, 2014 and oral hyiene controllability.
Accepted February 10, 2014
Methods our hundred eihtytwo collee students in ¥yeonido completed the Myers
ris type indicator (MI) and a uestionnaire and collected data were analyed by A .
proram.
esults ompared to etroverted subects a sinificantly increased percentae of introverted
subects demonstrated oral malodor and stress (p¨.). onue coatin and stress seemed to
occur the most freuently in intuitionfeelin () type while oral malodor seemed to occur
the most freuently in sensationfeelin () type amon four fuctional types. onue coatin
and stress seemed to occur the most freuently in type while oral malodor seemed to occur
the most freuently in sensationperceivin (P) type amon four temperaments. inificantly
increased mean scales of tonue scrapin inde and oral hyiene controllability inde were
found for etroverts (p¨.). Mean scales of tooth brushin inde and oral hyiene control
Correspondence to: lability inde appeared to be the hihest in type amon four fuctional types. Mean scales
Hye Sook Park of tonue scrapin inde and oral hyiene controllability inde appeared to be the hihest in
Department of Dental Laboratory sensationudin (J) type amon four temperaments.
Technology, Shingu College, 377, onclusions Oral hyiene controllability was associated with personality type and it is neces
Gwangmyeong-ro, Jungwon-gu, sary to develop oral health education proram considerin personality type.
Seongnam 462-743, Korea
Tel: +82-31-740-1575
Fax: +82-31-740-1589
E-mail: hspark@shingu.ac.kr Key Words: MI£ Oral hyiene£ Personality£ ¯uestionnaires
INTRODUCTION individuals differ in the way that they relate to or interpret
their environments and the way is said to reflect their indi
)
In modern society oral health has been considered as an vidual personality.
important factor to maintain a wellbein life. herefore he Myersris type indicator (MI) delineates per
attention to oral hyiene care has been more increasin sonality types based on Junian typoloy and identifies
than the past. he ey point for oral hyiene care is said to preferences for four dichotomous dimensions ‘etroversion’
)
be to remove the dental plaue. versus ‘introversion’ ‘sensation’ versus ‘intuition’ ‘thinin’
)
Oral malodor of oral etioloy may result from ecessive versus ‘feelin’ and ‘udin’ versus ‘perceivin’.
microbial metabolism on the tonue dorsum and periodon here is a previous study on the relation of personality
) )
tium periodontal disease ecessive caries poor oral hy preference and performance level. adash and Proshe
iene oral ulcers food impaction unclean denture and dry showed that oral hyiene status was related to personal and
)
mouth. academic profiles. eports on attitude and behavior of oral
) )
People under stressful conditions may show dry mouth health care have been also suested. owever to date
and decreased salivary production can lead to increased no analysis of oral hyiene performance and personality
)
ris of unfavorable oral condition. tress is one type of the type has been performed. he aim of this study was to as
)
interaction between the individual and environment. All sess the association between oral hyiene controllability
Copyright 2014 Korean Academy of Orofacial Pain and Oral Medicine. All rights reserved.
ⓒ
www.kaom.org
J Oral Med Pain Vol. 39 No. 1, March 2014
16
and personality type and to use the result for oral health prepared uestionnaire (i. ) containin items on self
education. evaluation of tonue coatin oral malodor stress and hab
it related to tooth brushin and tonue scrapin and also
MATERIALS AND METHODS returned the completed answers.
ollected MI replies were analysed and scored ac
)
1. Subjects cordin to routine MI analysis. o assess uantitavely
ata were collected from collee students in ¥yeoni and obectively the oral hyiene habit freuency of tooth
do includin men and women. Mean ae of the brushin per day was rated on the followin to ratin
subects was .± . years (able ). scale where indicated once indicated twice indicated
)
three times and indicated four times or more per day.
2. Data Collection ime needed for each brushin was rated on the followin
ata were obtained in eptember and October of . to ratin scale where indicated less than seconds
After eplainin MI the eaminer distributed the MI indicated from seconds to minute indicated more
¥ form to students and retrieved completed replies at their than minute to minutes and indicated more than
)
classroom. Moreover the students were ased to answer the minutes to minutes indicated more than minutes.
hus tooth brushin inde was defined as follows tooth
Table 1. Demographics of the subjects brushin inde®freuency of tooth brushin per day (score
Sex Subject Age (y) )×time needed for each brushin (score
)
Men 233 (48.3) 21.4±2.9 ). In addition tonue scrapin inde which scored the
Women 249 (51.7) 20.9±3.1 freuency of tonue scrapin was estimated on a scale of
Total 482 (100.0) 21.1±3.0 as follows ®not fied£ ®once per day£ ®with tooth
Values are presented as number (%) or mean±standard deviation. )
brushin. urthermore tonue scrapin inde added to
Fig. 1. Form and contents of questionnaire.
www.kaom.org
Hye Sook Park. Oral Hygiene Controllability and Personality Type Test (MBTI)
17
tooth brushin inde made oral hyiene controllability in eperienced and (.§) sometimes eperienced (able
de that is oral hyiene controllability inde®tooth brush ). hree hundred sityone (
.
§) subects felt oral mal
)
in indetonue scrapin inde. odor amon whom
(
.§) slihtly felt and (.§)
stronly felt (able ). wo hundred sitynine (.§) sub
3. Statistical Analyses ects were under stressful condition (able ). ith respect
All the statistical analyses were performed by A . to four preferences of personality etroversion () type was
proram (A Institute Inc. ary A). he chisuare demonstrated by (.§) introversion (I) type by
test was used to evaluate the relationship of personal (.§) sensation () type by
(
.§) intuition ()
ity types to selfreportin prevalence rate of tonue coat type by (.§) thinin () type by (.
§) feel
in oral malodor and stress. tudent’s ttest and oneway in () type by (
. §) udin (J) type by
(.§)
AO¬A were performed to evaluate the difference of mean and perceivin (P) type by (.§) (able ). ompared
scales of tooth brushin inde tonue scrapin inde and to etroverted subects a sinificantly increased percent
oral hyiene controllability inde accordin to personality ae of introverted subects demonstrated oral malodor and
types. stress (p¨.) (able ). onue coatin and oral malodor
seemed to occur more freuently in type than in type
RESULTS (able ). type and P type appeared to have hiher preva
lence of oral malodor than type and J type respectively
wo hundred twentyfive (.§) subects have eperi (able ).
enced tonue coatin amon whom (.
§) freuently eardin four psycholoical functions (sensationthinin
Table 2. Prevalence of tongue coating, oral malodor and stress according to 4 pairs of preference tendency
Four pairs of preferences
Item number and
symptom E I S N T F J P
266 (55.2) 216 (44.8) 379 (78.6) 103 (21.4) 302 (62.7) 180 (37.3) 270 (56.0) 212 (44.0)
1. Tongue coating 121 104 175 50 136 89 134 91
225 (46.9) (45.5) (48.2) (46.2) (48.5) (45.0) (49.4) (49.6) (42.9)
p-value 0.5606 0.6691 0.3477 0.1430
2. Oral malodor 188 173 288 73 223 138 195 166
361 (75.7) (70.7) (80.1) (76.0) (70.9) (73.8) (76.7) (72.2) (78.3)
p-value 0.0177* 0.2884 0.4889 0.1265
3. Stress 137 132 213 56 175 94 152 117
269 (55.8) (51.5) (61.1) (56.2) (54.4) (58.0) (52.2) (56.3) (55.2)
p-value 0.0347* 0.7400 0.2209 0.8080
E, extroversion type; I, introversion type; S, sensation type; N, intuition type; T, thinking type; F, feeling type; J, judging type; P, perceiving type.
Values are presented as number (%).
*p-values were completed by chi-square test.
Table 3. Prevalence of tongue coating, oral malodor and stress according to four psychological functions
Four functions
Item number and symptom NF NT SF ST
51 (10.6) 52 (10.8) 129 (26.7) 250 (51.9) p-value
1. Tongue coating 27 (52.9) 23 (44.2) 62 (48.1) 113 (45.2) 0.7416
2. Oral malodor 39 (76.5) 34 (65.4) 99 (76.7) 189 (75.6) 0.4122
3. Stress 31 (60.8) 25 (48.1) 63 (48.8) 150 (60.0) 0.1071
NF, intuition-feeling; NT, intuition-thinking; SF, sensation-feeling; ST, sensation-thinking.
Values are presented as number (%).
p-values were completed by chi-square test.
www.kaom.org
J Oral Med Pain Vol. 39 No. 1, March 2014
18
³´ sensationfeelin ³´ intuitionthinin ³´ intu while oral malodor seemed to occur the most freuently in
itionfeelin ³´) type was shown by (.§) P type (able ).
type by (.
§) type by (.§) and type by inificantly increased mean scales of tonue scrapin in
(.§) (able ). onue coatin and stress seemed to de and oral hyiene controllability inde were found for
occur the most freuently in type while oral malodor etroverts (p¨.) (able ). Mean scales of tooth brushin
seemed to occur the most freuently in type (able ). inde tonue scrapin inde and oral hyiene controllability
oncernin four temperaments (sensationperceivin ³P´ inde appeared to be hiher in J type than in P type (able ).
sensationudin ³J´ ) P type was ehibited by Mean scales of tooth brushin inde and oral hyiene
(.§) J type by
(.§) type by (.§) controllability inde appeared to be the hihest in type
and type by (.§) (able ). onue coatin and (able ).
stress seemed to occur the most freuently in type Mean scales of tonue scrapin inde and oral hyiene
Table 4. Prevalence of tongue coating, oral malodor and stress according to four temperaments
Four temperaments
Item number and symptom NF NT SJ SP
51 (10.6) 52 (10.8) 237 (49.2) 142 (29.4) p-value
1. Tongue coating 27 (52.9) 23 (44.2) 120 (50.6) 55 (38.7) 0.1106
2. Oral malodor 39 (76.5) 34 (65.4) 177 (74.7) 111 (78.2) 0.3361
3. Stress 31 (60.8) 25 (48.1) 131 (55.3) 82 (57.8) 0.5691
NF, intuition-feeling; NT, intuition-thinking; SJ, sensation-judging; SP, sensation-perceiving.
Values are presented as number (%).
p-values were completed by chi-square test.
Table 5. Mean scales of tooth brushing index, tongue scraping index and oral hygiene controllability index according to 4 pairs of preference
tendency
Four pairs of preferences
Index
E I S N T F J P
Tooth brushing index (8.4±3.5) 8.6±3.6 8.2±3.5 8.4±3.6 8.6±3.4 8.4±3.4 8.5±3.7 8.6±3.6 8.2±3.5
p-value 0.5606 0.7133 0.7731 0.1441
Tongue scraping index (6.8±2.6) 7.1±2.4 6.5±2.8 6.8±2.6 6.8±2.7 6.8±2.6 6.8±2.6 6.9±2.5 6.6±2.7
p-value 0.0248* 0.8867 0.9321 0.1859
Oral hygiene controllability index (15.2±4.8) 15.7±4.6 14.7±5.0 15.2±4.8 15.3±4.6 15.2±4.7 15.3±4.9 15.6±4.7 14.8±4.9
p-value 0.0304* 0.8461 0.7952 0.0716
E, extroversion type; I, introversion type; S, sensation type; N, intuition type; T, thinking type; F, feeling type; J, judging type; P, perceiving type.
Values are mean±standard deviation.
*p-values were completed by Student’s t-test.
Table 6. Mean scales of tooth brushing index, tongue scraping index and oral hygiene controllability index according to four psychological
functions
Four functions
Index
NF NT SF ST p-value
Tooth brushing index 8.7±3.6 8.4±3.1 8.4±3.7 8.4±3.5 0.9457
Tongue scraping index 6.7±2.7 6.8±2.7 6.9±2.6 6.8±2.6 0.9952
Oral hygiene controllability index 15.5±4.9 15.2±4.4 15.3±4.9 15.2±4.8 0.9872
NF, intuition-feeling; NT, intuition-thinking; SF, sensation-feeling; ST, sensation-thinking.
Values are mean±standard deviation.
p-values were completed by one-way ANOVA.
www.kaom.org
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
