Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the impact that national income and income inequality in high and low income countries have on the relationship between dental caries and sugar consumption. Methods: An ecological study design was used in this study of 73 countries. The mean decayed, missing, or filled permanent teeth (DMFT) for 12-year-old children were obtained from the WHO Oral Health Country/Area Profile Programme. United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization data were used for per capita sugar consumption. Gross national incomes per capita based on purchasing power parity and the Gini coefficient were obtained from World Bank data. Bivariate and multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to estimate the associations between mean DMFT and per capita sugar consumption in different income and income inequality countries. Results: Bivariate and multivariate regression analysis showed that countries with a high national income and low income inequality have a strong negative association between sugar consumption and caries (B = –2.80, R2 = 0.17), whereas countries with a low income and high income inequality have a strong positive relationship between DMFT and per capita sugar consumption (B = –0.89, R2 = 0.20). Conclusion: The relationship between per capita consumption of sugar and dental caries is modified by the absolute level of income of the country, but not by the level of income inequality within a country.

1.
Barondess JA: Specialization and the physician workforce: drivers and determinants. JAMA 2000;284:1299–1301.
2.
Burt BA, Pai S: Sugar consumption and caries risk: a systematic review. J Dent Educ 2001;65:1017–1023.
3.
Diez-Roux AV, Link BG, Northridge ME: A multilevel analysis of income inequality and cardiovascular disease risk factors. Soc Sci Med 2000;50:673–687.
4.
Edelstein BL: The dental caries pandemic and disparities problem. BMC Oral Health 2006;6(suppl 1):S2.
5.
Harel-Raviv M, Laskaris M, Chu KS: Dental caries and sugar consumption into the 21st century. Am J Dent 1996;9:184–190.
6.
Holst D: Causes and prevention of dental caries: a perspective on cases and incidence. Oral Health Prev Dent 2005;3:9–14.
7.
Ismail AI, Tanzer JM, Dingle JL: Current trends of sugar consumption in developing societies. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1997;25:438–443.
8.
Kim D, Kawachi I, Hoorn SV, Ezzati M: Is inequality at the heart of it? Cross-country associations of income inequality with cardiovascular diseases and risk factors. Soc Sci Med 2008;66:1719–1732.
9.
Kondo N, Kawachi I, Subramanian SV, Takeda Y, Yamagata Z: Do social comparisons explain the association between income inequality and health? Relative deprivation and perceived health among male and female Japanese individuals. Soc Sci Med 2008;67:982–987.
10.
Lochner K, Pamuk E, Makuc D, Kennedy BP, Kawachi I: State-level income inequality and individual mortality risk: a prospective, multilevel study. Am J Public Health 2001;91:385–391.
11.
Lynch J, Smith GD, Harper S, Hillemeier M: Is income inequality a determinant of population health? 2. U.S. National and regional trends in income inequality and age- and cause-specific mortality. Milbank Q 2004;82:355–400.
12.
Maltz M, Jardim JJ, Alves LS: Health promotion and dental caries. Braz Oral Res 2010;24 (suppl 1):18–25.
13.
Masood M, Yusof N, Hassan MI, Jaafar N: Longitudinal study of dental caries increment in Malaysian school children: a 5-year cohort study. Asia Pac J Public Health 2012, E-pub ahead of print.
14.
Moynihan PJ: Dietary advice in dental practice. Br Dent J 2002;193:563–568.
15.
Moynihan PJ: The role of diet and nutrition in the etiology and prevention of oral diseases. Bull World Health Organ 2005;83:694–699.
16.
Petersen PE: The world oral health report 2003: Continuous improvement of oral health in the 21st century – the approach of the WHO global oral health programme. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2003;31(suppl 1):3–23.
17.
Petersen PE: One in a million: the facts about water fluoridation. Manchester, British Fluoridation Society, 2012.
18.
Petersen PE, Bourgeois D, Ogawa H, Estupinan-Day S, Ndiaye C: The global burden of oral diseases and risks to oral health. Bull World Health Organ 2005;83:661–669.
19.
Sabbah W, Sheiham A, Bernabe E: Income inequality and periodontal diseases in rich countries: an ecological cross-sectional study. Int Dent J 2010;60:370–374.
20.
Sanders TA: Diet and general health: dietary counselling. Caries Res 2004;38(suppl 1):3–8.
21.
Sayegh A, Dini EL, Holt RD, Bedi R: Food and drink consumption, sociodemographic factors and dental caries in 4–5-year-old children in Amman, Jordan. Br Dent J 2002;193:37–42.
22.
Sembajwe G, Cifuentes M, Tak SW, Kriebel D, Gore R, Punnett L: National income, self-reported wheezing and asthma diagnosis from the world health survey. Eur Respir J 2010; 35:279–286.
23.
Sheiham A: Dietary effects on dental diseases. Public Health Nutr 2001;4:569–591.
24.
Sisson KL: Theoretical explanations for social inequalities in oral health. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2007;35:81–88.
25.
Subramanian SV, Blakely T, Kawachi I: Income inequality as a public health concern: where do we stand? Commentary on ‘is exposure to income inequality a public health concern?’. Health Serv Res 2003;38:153–167.
27.
WHO: Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases: report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation. Geneva, WHO, 2003.
29.
Wilkinson RG, Pickett KE: Income inequality and population health: a review and explanation of the evidence. Soc Sci Med 2006;62:1768–1784.
30.
Woodward M, Walker AR: Sugar consumption and dental caries: evidence from 90 countries. Br Dent J 1994;176:297–302.
33.
Zero DT: Sugars – the arch criminal? Caries Res 2004;38:277–285.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.