Alice J Horncastle, Taylor D Gauld, Moira B Smith, W Murray Thomson
{"title":"Comparing approaches to determining poor oral health among older adults in a national survey.","authors":"Alice J Horncastle, Taylor D Gauld, Moira B Smith, W Murray Thomson","doi":"10.1111/ger.12729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the clinical validity of the three approaches in residential care facility residents.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>In NZ residential care facilities, the interRAI assessment tool is used by trained registered nurses for assessing oral status when new residents are admitted, but its validity has been questioned. Although Locker's global oral health item has been used to measure oral health in surveys and health services research, it is not routinely used in care facilities, yet its clinical validity has been demonstrated in population-based samples. Self-perceived oral health need may also be useful.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using a secondary analysis of clinical and self-reported data from a national survey of nursing home residents (the 2012 New Zealand Older People's Oral Health Survey, or OPOHS), we compared the validity of Locker's item, the interRAI tool and self-reported treatment need for identifying three key clinical indicators of poor oral health among dentate older adults; those were coronal caries (3+ teeth affected), root caries (1+ teeth affected) and xerostomia. Analyses were conducted using STATA, and survey weighting was used to obtain estimates for a source population of 25-843 individuals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The prevalence of 3+ teeth with coronal caries was 28.7% (23.9, 34.0), the prevalence of 1+ teeth with root caries was 33.7% (28.7, 39.0), the prevalence of xerostomia was 23.1% (18.4, 28.3). Marked gradients in prevalence risk ratio were seen across different categories of Locker's global oral health item and the interRAI assessment tooth for coronal caries and xerostomia. Locker's global oral health item gave a better fitting model and was more discriminative in detecting coronal caries than the interRAI assessment tool (Lockers AIC = 0.76, interRAI AIC = 0.81). None of the approaches was particularly discriminative for root surface caries experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Self-reported approaches are discriminative for poor oral health. Standardised assessment tools used in residential care facilities should consider including a self-assessment component such as Locker's global oral health item.</p>","PeriodicalId":12583,"journal":{"name":"Gerodontology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gerodontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ger.12729","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the clinical validity of the three approaches in residential care facility residents.
Background: In NZ residential care facilities, the interRAI assessment tool is used by trained registered nurses for assessing oral status when new residents are admitted, but its validity has been questioned. Although Locker's global oral health item has been used to measure oral health in surveys and health services research, it is not routinely used in care facilities, yet its clinical validity has been demonstrated in population-based samples. Self-perceived oral health need may also be useful.
Materials and methods: Using a secondary analysis of clinical and self-reported data from a national survey of nursing home residents (the 2012 New Zealand Older People's Oral Health Survey, or OPOHS), we compared the validity of Locker's item, the interRAI tool and self-reported treatment need for identifying three key clinical indicators of poor oral health among dentate older adults; those were coronal caries (3+ teeth affected), root caries (1+ teeth affected) and xerostomia. Analyses were conducted using STATA, and survey weighting was used to obtain estimates for a source population of 25-843 individuals.
Results: The prevalence of 3+ teeth with coronal caries was 28.7% (23.9, 34.0), the prevalence of 1+ teeth with root caries was 33.7% (28.7, 39.0), the prevalence of xerostomia was 23.1% (18.4, 28.3). Marked gradients in prevalence risk ratio were seen across different categories of Locker's global oral health item and the interRAI assessment tooth for coronal caries and xerostomia. Locker's global oral health item gave a better fitting model and was more discriminative in detecting coronal caries than the interRAI assessment tool (Lockers AIC = 0.76, interRAI AIC = 0.81). None of the approaches was particularly discriminative for root surface caries experience.
Conclusion: Self-reported approaches are discriminative for poor oral health. Standardised assessment tools used in residential care facilities should consider including a self-assessment component such as Locker's global oral health item.
期刊介绍:
The ultimate aim of Gerodontology is to improve the quality of life and oral health of older people. The boundaries of most conventional dental specialties must be repeatedly crossed to provide optimal dental care for older people. In addition, management of other health problems impacts on dental care and clinicians need knowledge in these numerous overlapping areas. Bringing together these diverse topics within one journal serves clinicians who are seeking to read and to publish papers across a broad spectrum of specialties. This journal provides the juxtaposition of papers from traditional specialties but which share this patient-centred interest, providing a synergy that serves progress in the subject of gerodontology.