#55 Dentinogenesis Imperfecta: Rel<strong>at</strong>ionship <strong>of</strong> Genotype with Clinical and RadiographicFe<strong>at</strong>uresJ. SHAHANGIAN, K. LOECHNER, A. MOL and T. WRIGHTDepartment <strong>of</strong> Pedi<strong>at</strong>ric <strong>Dentistry</strong>, <strong>UNC</strong> Pedi<strong>at</strong>ric Endocrinology, and Department <strong>of</strong> Diagnostic Sciences &General <strong>Dentistry</strong>Dentinogenesis Imperfecta (DGI) is characterized by abnormal dentin mineraliz<strong>at</strong>ion th<strong>at</strong> can result in teeth th<strong>at</strong>are abnormal in shape and size, th<strong>at</strong> are yellow-brown to opalescent blue gray in color, th<strong>at</strong> are prone to enamelfracturing and severe wear. DGI can be associ<strong>at</strong>ed with several subtypes <strong>of</strong> Osteogenesis Imperfecta (OI) wherethe p<strong>at</strong>ient has mineraliz<strong>at</strong>ion defects <strong>of</strong> bone (DGI-1). Additionally DGI can be limited to affecting only thedentition (DGI-2). <strong>The</strong> genes associ<strong>at</strong>ed with DGI-1 include COL1A1, COL1A2, and DGI-2 is caused by DSPPmut<strong>at</strong>ions. Our knowledge <strong>of</strong> phenotype-genotype rel<strong>at</strong>ionships in DGI is limited given the paucity <strong>of</strong> studies onthese conditions. Objectives: This study investig<strong>at</strong>es the rel<strong>at</strong>ionship <strong>of</strong> phenotype and genotype in OI and DGI.Methods: Study participants were recruited and diagnosed with DGI based on major and minor dental phenotypicfe<strong>at</strong>ures while the OI diagnosis was made by <strong>UNC</strong> Pedi<strong>at</strong>ric Endocrinology using clinical and genetic criteria. Allparticipants had clinical and radiographic dental examin<strong>at</strong>ions. <strong>The</strong>ir dental shade was measured using acolorimetric instrument. <strong>The</strong> intraoral radiographs were taken with a densitometry instrument incorpor<strong>at</strong>ed on theXCP to allow measurement <strong>of</strong> dentinal density. Results: We currently have 18 DGI-1 participants examined. Ofthese, 3 are OI-I, 5 OI-III, 8 OI-IV, and 2 unknown subtypes. We examined 5 OI p<strong>at</strong>ients who did not have clinicalor radiographic evidence <strong>of</strong> DGI, most <strong>of</strong> whom had an unknown OI subtype. We have examined and diagnosed10 DGI-2 p<strong>at</strong>ients. Combined we have examined 28 DGI p<strong>at</strong>ients including 13 males and 15 females with amedian age <strong>of</strong> 9(range 2-66). <strong>The</strong>re were 19 whites, 4 African Americans, and 5 others. We examined and foundno disease in 5 DGI-1 and 5 DGI-2 participants’ family members. <strong>The</strong> DGI-1 group had 71% Class III occlusionwhile <strong>at</strong> 67% Class I was the most prevalent occlusion in DGI-2. 56% <strong>of</strong> the DGI-1 p<strong>at</strong>ients also had blue scleracompared to none in the DGI-2 group. Also 33% <strong>of</strong> DGI-1 p<strong>at</strong>ients had open bites while only 17% <strong>of</strong> the DGI-2group had this malocclusion. Our recruitment and analysis and ongoing and we are well positioned to reach ourintended sample size <strong>of</strong> 100 participants.#56 Evalu<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> Knowledge, Attitudes, and Self-Reported Behaviors Rel<strong>at</strong>ed to an OralHealth and Nutrition Intervention with 3-5 Year Old Head Start ChildrenJ. GRANT, R. QUINONEZ and M. ROBERTSDepartment <strong>of</strong> Pedi<strong>at</strong>ric <strong>Dentistry</strong>Objectives: <strong>The</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> this study was to evalu<strong>at</strong>e <strong>at</strong>titudes, knowledge, and self-reported behaviors <strong>of</strong> 3-5 yearold Head Start Children particip<strong>at</strong>ing in a nutrition and oral hygiene intervention using a developmentallyappropri<strong>at</strong>e prop-based interview technique. Methods: <strong>The</strong> study was a parallel two arm pre and post surveydesign in collabor<strong>at</strong>ion with the Department <strong>of</strong> Psychology <strong>at</strong> <strong>North</strong> <strong>Carolina</strong> (NC) St<strong>at</strong>e <strong>University</strong>. <strong>The</strong>intervention subjects (47 subjects) were given a prop-based pre-test, 8-10 minute intervention, and a post-test; thel<strong>at</strong>ter the same as the initial prop based questionnaire. Similarly, the control group <strong>of</strong> 43 received a pre-test andpost-test two weeks l<strong>at</strong>er; however, intervention was delivered after the study was completed. Results: A positiverel<strong>at</strong>ionship was found for the entire group between pre and two week post-interview composite scores for oralhealth knowledge. <strong>The</strong>re were no significant findings found for nutrition <strong>at</strong>titudes, nutrition knowledge, nutritionbehavior, oral health <strong>at</strong>titudes, or oral health behavior when adjusted for dental need, race, or type <strong>of</strong> interview.Conclusion: Interactive teaching, particularly when rel<strong>at</strong>ed to children's daily lives, is beneficial to changingknowledge, <strong>at</strong>titudes, and behaviors. Inform<strong>at</strong>ion g<strong>at</strong>hered from this descriptive study may help improve theapproach to oral health and nutritional intervention for young children and the promotion <strong>of</strong> health and diseaseprevention in clinical practice.36
#57 Perin<strong>at</strong>al Dental Care: Attitudes and Practices <strong>of</strong> <strong>North</strong> <strong>Carolina</strong> DentistsE. PRADA, J.Y. LEE, G. ROZIER, and L. ZELDINDepartments <strong>of</strong> Pedi<strong>at</strong>ric <strong>Dentistry</strong> and Health Policy & ManagementObjective: To examine general dentists’ knowledge, <strong>at</strong>titudes, and practices regarding dental care and anticip<strong>at</strong>oryguidance for pregnant women, infants and toddlers. Methods: An 86-item questionnaire was sent to 1,000practicing general dentists. Eight survey domains were used to identify dentists’ knowledge, practices,confidence, barriers to care, educ<strong>at</strong>ional background, practice characteristics, personal demographics, and opinionsabout the physician’s role in oral health. <strong>The</strong> primary dependent variables analyzed were whether dentists tre<strong>at</strong>edpregnant women and young children. Multivari<strong>at</strong>e regression was completed using STATA 9.0 to determinefactors th<strong>at</strong> predict dentists’ practices (P
Change language