CAJ | 학술논문

目的：研究行为认知六步法（cognitive behavioral six-step method）是否更有利于促进社区人群口腔保健行为的改善，从而更有利于社区人群牙周病的防治。方法于2014年3月随机抽样获取广州天河石牌社区人群中社区牙周指数（CPI）符合3区段的50人，随机分配进入干预组和对照组，每组25人。干预组人群进行行为认知六步法干预，对照组人群只接受传统的口腔卫生宣教。干预组和对照组人群干预前、干预后1个月、干预3个月分别检查龈沟出血指数（SBI）、菌斑指数（PI）、牙周探诊深度（PD），并进行特定任务自我效检量表（SESS）评分。结果干预组人群接受行为认知六步法干预后1个月、干预后3个月的PI、SBI、刷牙自我效检均得到明显的改善，且与对照组相比，差异均具有统计学意义（PI：1个月，t＝－8.73，P＝0.001；3个月，t＝－7.88，P＝0.001；SBI：1个月，t＝－7.71，P＝0.001；3个月，t＝－5.00，P＝0.001；刷牙自我效检：1个月，t＝10.36，P＝0.001；3个月，t＝10.27，P＝0.001）。而PD改善不明显，差异无统计学意义（1个月，t＝－1.87，P＝0.068；3个月，t＝－1.26，P＝0.094）。结论与传统口腔卫生宣教相比，行为认知六步法能更好地改善社区人群的口腔保健行为，从而利于促进社区人群的牙周病防治。
목적：연구행위인지륙보법（cognitive behavioral six-step method）시부경유리우촉진사구인군구강보건행위적개선，종이경유리우사구인군아주병적방치。방법우2014년3월수궤추양획취엄주천하석패사구인군중사구아주지수（CPI）부합3구단적50인，수궤분배진입간예조화대조조，매조25인。간예조인군진행행위인지륙보법간예，대조조인군지접수전통적구강위생선교。간예조화대조조인군간예전、간예후1개월、간예3개월분별검사간구출혈지수（SBI）、균반지수（PI）、아주탐진심도（PD），병진행특정임무자아효검량표（SESS）평분。결과간예조인군접수행위인지륙보법간예후1개월、간예후3개월적PI、SBI、쇄아자아효검균득도명현적개선，차여대조조상비，차이균구유통계학의의（PI：1개월，t＝－8.73，P＝0.001；3개월，t＝－7.88，P＝0.001；SBI：1개월，t＝－7.71，P＝0.001；3개월，t＝－5.00，P＝0.001；쇄아자아효검：1개월，t＝10.36，P＝0.001；3개월，t＝10.27，P＝0.001）。이PD개선불명현，차이무통계학의의（1개월，t＝－1.87，P＝0.068；3개월，t＝－1.26，P＝0.094）。결론여전통구강위생선교상비，행위인지륙보법능경호지개선사구인군적구강보건행위，종이리우촉진사구인군적아주병방치。
Objective To explore the effect of cognitive behavioral six-step method on the improvement of the oral health behavior and the periodontal disease control of community people . Methods Fifty people selected form community population with CPI code 3 were randomly assigned into the intervention and control groups . People in the intervention group were received six-step behavioral cognitive intervention , while people in the control group were given traditional oral hygiene instruction. Periodontal changes including plaque index (PI), sulcus bleeding index (SBI) and probing depth (PD) as well as the scores of task-specific self-efficacy scale for self-care (SESS) were evaluated respectively at three observation points (before intervention as the baseline, 1 month and 3 months after intervention). Results The scores of PI, SBI and brushing self-efficacy at 1 month and 3 months were improved significantly after intervention for both groups , and the intervention group demonstrated significantly greater outcomes compared with the control group (PI: 1 month, t=-8.73, P=0.001;3 months, t=-7.88, P=0.001;SBI: 1 month, t=-7.71, P=0.001; 3 months, t=-5.00, P=0.001;brushing self-efficacy: 1 month, t=10.36, P=0.001; 3 months, t=10.27, P=0.001). However, no significant difference in PD was shown between intervention and control groups at all three observation points (1 month, t=-1.87, P=0.068; 3 months, t=-1.26, P=0.094). Conclusion Comparing with the traditional oral hygiene education , cognitive behavioral six-step method demonstrates a superior promoting in the oral health behavior and periodontal disease prevention of community population .