The reflection on the complexity of the aspects underlying the health condition from a bio-psycho- social perspective, led, in the past decades, to a substantially better knowledge and understanding of the individual perception on disease and, implicitly, imposed the reconsideration, often radical, of the nosological definition criteria and of the prophylactic and therapeutic approach norms, subordinated to a series of permanently enriched recovery objectives. Given the variable rate from one medical field to another, in connectionwith a dynamic conceptual evolution, the attitudinal modifications in clinical practice proved to be useful in medical dentistry as well,being correlated with the immensity of the technological progress in the area of investigative and therapeutic support and especially with the advancements with a prospective significance from the perspective of histology and bio-compatibility.
Appreciated from a biological perspective, the health of the stomatognathic system has improved its morphological and functional evaluation frame with every stage in the evolution of knowledge. Its labeling was imposed in association with the psychological impact elements which developed with reference to the criterion- related and esthetic aspects, elements that also undergo permanent changes, depending on the educational level and on the proportions of the occupational dynamics in the new context of social mobility. All these led, in a remarkably
short period of time, to the markedly felt necessity of diversifying medical specializations and subordinate specializations, and, moreover, of approaching, in an interdisciplinary manner, the oral health problems. Thus, there appeared specializations consecrated to pathology subgroups, as well as to pathological species.
Specializations consecrated to the pathology correlated with or specific to sex were also set up. In addition, the specificity of the dental assistance measures made it necessary to distinguish some fields dedicated to the dental pathology of age categories, the individuality of juvenile and geriatric dentistry being unanimously acknowledged. As concerns the adult age, for the dental pathology in the 18-35 age interval, the evaluations deriving from multi-varied analyses in statistical studies conducted on a large number
of persons revealed, without the possibility of hiding them in terms of a nuanced practice decision, significant phenomena from the
perspective of the profile of the incidence of morbidity, as well as from the perspective of evolving patterns, phenomena that are specific to such a distinct period, due to the insufficient consolidation of the physiological and physiopathological
mechanisms. These are, in short, the primary elements that lead to the necessity of developing a distinct dental practice frame for the age interval we referred to, of accepting and imposing some specialized educational-formative curricula in the dental education system. The subsequent benefits of this measure will definitely be felt in the satisfaction of young people with oral health problems, treated with the help of information collected in a dedicated curricular discipline, and the resentments concerning the semantic freedom will, just like always in the course of history, will be appropriately and reticently acknowledged when juvenile dentistry becomes a dedicated discipline, claim justified via all the above cited reasons. Good luck to Juvenile Dentistry!
May the young beneficiaries have a nice future!