The Dental group of the Polish Small Animal Veterinary Association together with Masterfoods Polska ran the third edition of the Pet Smile Campaign (PSC) in 2005. The PSC Team prepared materials for owners, instructions for the veterinarians, posters and the questionnaires for participating veterinary surgeons to fill in based on examined pet's oral health status.

Materials and methods

In 2005, members of the Dental Working Group of the Polish Small Animal Veterinary Association (PSAVA) and representatives of Masterfoods Poland recruited over 400 veterinary practices to provide free oral examinations of pet cats and dogs. The examination procedure consisted of three parts: 3 minutes dental/periodontal examination (no sedation or GA applied), 3 minutes interview and filling in the questionnaire with the owner, and 3 minutes presentation of diagnosis to the owner, instruction for home oral hygiene methods, and recommendation of professional treatment.

Each oral health check was documented in the standardized chart which included following parameters: age of the patients, their gender and bodyweight, type of diet fed and extent of home oral hygiene. Bodyweight was divided into 5 groups in dogs (<5, 5-10, 10-25, 25-40 >40) and in 2 groups in cats (<5kg >5kg). Dental examination protocol consisted of: size of mandibular lymph nodes evaluated on palpation, presence of dental deposits, and presence of periodontal disease. The size of mandibular lymph nodes was determined as: normal, slightly enlarged, or moderately to severely enlarged. The presence of dental deposits was determined visually of the most severely affected tooth and was recorded as absent, up to 50% of the crown affected, or more than 50% of the crown affected. The presence of periodontal disease was determined visually. Gingivitis was specified as inflammation of gingival tissue, (abnormal reddening or bleeding of the gums). Periodontitis was recorded when a tooth had gingival recession or was mobile on digital palpation. The scheme and scoring system is presented in the Table 1.

Other parameters that were marked in the questionnaire: diet (five options): dry food, dry and tinned or other soft commercial food, mixed home-made and commercial food, only home-made food) and oral prophylaxis (five options): daily teeth-brushing; daily dental chews, 2-3 times a week dental chew or brushing, seldom dental chews or brushing, none. Breeds of the examined patients were also recorded but the results are not reported here.

The oral health index was defined as the summation of scores obtained for the three parameters: lymphadenopathy, dental deposits, and periodontal disease, with 0 points indicating optimal oral health, and 6 points indicating most negative oral health status. A one-way analysis of covariance was performed to adjust for age. Significance was defined as p < 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 12.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

Results

In 12344 evaluated animals 70.6% were the dogs (8712) and 29.4% cats (3632). The results regarding each of evaluated parameters are presented in Table 1 (cats) and Table 2 (dogs)

All parameters were adjusted to the mean age that in cats was 4,801 yrs and in dogs 5,758 yrs. The most significant influencing parameter on oral heath status has the age. Bodyweight, oral hygiene and diet also had significant influence on oral health index, the most positive correlation were: big size of the dog (over 25 kg)* and smaller size in cats (less than 5 kg), dry diet and daily oral prophylaxis in both species. There are significant differences in oral health among the animals fed different diets and having different extent of oral hygiene. The cats fed dry, mixed commercial and homemade food diet had increasing oral health index respectively which means decreasing oral health status. In dogs was noted additional difference between soft commercial and homemade food.

Conclusions

1.  The age is the most important factor at oral cavity condition.

2.  Significant influencing factors are: diet, bodyweight and oral hygiene.

3.  The best results in dogs oral health index were observed in groups of large individuals (over 25 kg) fed with dry food, and with daily teeth- brushing.

4.  The best oral health index was presented in cats less than 5 kg, fed with dry food and having daily oral hygiene (teeth-brushing or daily chews).

Table 1 Cats. Relations between evaluated parameters and oral health index

Table 2. Dogs. Relations between evaluated parameters and oral health index