Comparing approaches to determining poor oral health among older adults in a national survey.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Gerodontology Pub Date : 2023-11-27 DOI:10.1111/ger.12729
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.

在一项全国调查中比较确定老年人口腔健康状况不佳的方法。
目的:比较三种方法在安老院舍的临床效度。背景:在新西兰的住宿护理机构中,经过培训的注册护士使用interRAI评估工具来评估新居民入院时的口腔状况,但其有效性受到质疑。尽管Locker的全球口腔健康项目已在调查和卫生服务研究中用于衡量口腔健康,但它并未在护理机构中常规使用,但其临床有效性已在基于人群的样本中得到证明。自我感知的口腔健康需求也可能有用。材料和方法:通过对全国养老院居民调查(2012年新西兰老年人口腔健康调查,或OPOHS)的临床和自我报告数据的二次分析,我们比较了Locker’s项目、interRAI工具和自我报告的治疗需求的有效性,以确定牙齿有牙的老年人口腔健康状况不佳的三个关键临床指标;冠状龋(3+颗)、牙根龋(1+颗)和口干症。使用STATA进行分析,并使用调查加权法获得25-843个源种群的估计值。结果:3+牙冠龋患病率为28.7%(23.9,34.0),1+牙根龋患病率为33.7%(28.7,39.0),口干患病率为23.1%(18.4,28.3)。在Locker的全球口腔健康项目的不同类别中,以及在冠状龋和口干症的rai评估牙齿中,患病率风险比存在显著的梯度。与interRAI评估工具相比,Locker的整体口腔健康项目提供了更好的拟合模型,并且在检测冠状龋方面具有更强的辨别性(Locker AIC = 0.76, interRAI AIC = 0.81)。没有一种方法对牙根表面的龋病有特别的区别。结论:自我报告方法对口腔健康不良具有鉴别作用。在寄宿护理机构中使用的标准化评估工具应考虑包括自我评估部分,如洛克的全球口腔健康项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Gerodontology
Gerodontology 医学-老年医学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
50
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信