向患者提供口腔健康风险信息:PREFER三组随机对照试验和人种学

Rebecca V Harris, C. Vernazza, L. Laverty, V. Lowers, G. Burnside, Stephen L. Brown, S. Higham, L. Ternent
{"title":"向患者提供口腔健康风险信息:PREFER三组随机对照试验和人种学","authors":"Rebecca V Harris, C. Vernazza, L. Laverty, V. Lowers, G. Burnside, Stephen L. Brown, S. Higham, L. Ternent","doi":"10.3310/hsdr08030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: A new NHS dental practice contract is being tested using a traffic light (TL) system that categorises patients as being at red (high), amber (medium) or green (low) risk of poor oral health. This is intended to increase the emphasis on preventative dentistry, including giving advice on ways patients can improve their oral health. Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence (QLF™) cameras (Inspektor Research Systems BV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) also potentially offer a vivid portrayal of information on patients’ oral health. Methods: Systematic review – objective: to investigate how patients value and respond to different forms of information on health risks. Methods: electronic searches of nine databases, hand-searching of eight specialist journals and backwards and forwards citation-chasing followed by duplicate title, abstract- and paper-screening and data-extraction. Inclusion criteria limited studies to personalised information on risk given to patients as part of their health care. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) – setting: NHS dental practice. Objective: to investigate patients’ preferences for and response to different forms of information about risk given at check-ups. Design: a pragmatic, multicentred, three-arm, parallel-group, patient RCT. Participants: adults with a high/medium risk of poor oral health attending NHS dental practices. Interventions: (1) information given verbally supported by a card showing the patient’s TL risk category; (2) information given verbally supported by a QLF photograph of the patient’s mouth. The control was verbal information only (usual care). Main outcome measures: primary outcome – median valuation for the three forms of information measured by willingness to pay (WTP). Secondary outcomes included toothbrushing frequency and duration, dietary sugar intake, smoking status, self-rated oral health, a basic periodontal examination, Plaque Percentage Index and the number of tooth surfaces affected by caries (as measured by QLF). Qualitative study – an ethnography involving observations of 368 dental appointments and interviews with patients and dental teams. Results: Systematic review – the review identified 12 papers (nine of which were RCTs). Eight studies involved the use of computerised risk assessments in primary care. Intervention effects were generally modest, even with respect to modifying risk perceptions rather than altering behaviour or clinical outcomes. RCT – the trial found that 51% of patients identified verbal information as their most preferred form, 35% identified QLF as most preferred and 14% identified TL information as most preferred. The median WTP for TL was about half that for verbal information alone. Although at 6 and 12 months patients reported taking less sugar in drinks, and at 12 months patients reported longer toothbrushing, there was no difference by information group. Qualitative study – there was very little explicit risk talk. Lifestyle discussions were often cursory to avoid causing shame or embarrassment to patients. Limitations: Only 45% of patients were retained in the trial at 6 months and 31% were retained at 12 months. The trial was conducted in four dental practices, and five dental practices were involved in the qualitative work. Conclusions: Patients prefer personal, detailed verbal advice on oral health at their check-up. A new NHS dental practice contract using TL categorisation might make this less likely. Future work: Research on how to deliver, within time constraints, effective advice to patients on preventing poor oral health. More research on ‘risk work’ in wider clinical settings is also needed. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71242343. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.","PeriodicalId":12880,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Delivery Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Presenting patients with information on their oral health risk: the PREFER three-arm RCT and ethnography\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca V Harris, C. Vernazza, L. Laverty, V. Lowers, G. Burnside, Stephen L. Brown, S. Higham, L. Ternent\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/hsdr08030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: A new NHS dental practice contract is being tested using a traffic light (TL) system that categorises patients as being at red (high), amber (medium) or green (low) risk of poor oral health. This is intended to increase the emphasis on preventative dentistry, including giving advice on ways patients can improve their oral health. Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence (QLF™) cameras (Inspektor Research Systems BV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) also potentially offer a vivid portrayal of information on patients’ oral health. Methods: Systematic review – objective: to investigate how patients value and respond to different forms of information on health risks. Methods: electronic searches of nine databases, hand-searching of eight specialist journals and backwards and forwards citation-chasing followed by duplicate title, abstract- and paper-screening and data-extraction. Inclusion criteria limited studies to personalised information on risk given to patients as part of their health care. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) – setting: NHS dental practice. Objective: to investigate patients’ preferences for and response to different forms of information about risk given at check-ups. Design: a pragmatic, multicentred, three-arm, parallel-group, patient RCT. Participants: adults with a high/medium risk of poor oral health attending NHS dental practices. Interventions: (1) information given verbally supported by a card showing the patient’s TL risk category; (2) information given verbally supported by a QLF photograph of the patient’s mouth. The control was verbal information only (usual care). Main outcome measures: primary outcome – median valuation for the three forms of information measured by willingness to pay (WTP). Secondary outcomes included toothbrushing frequency and duration, dietary sugar intake, smoking status, self-rated oral health, a basic periodontal examination, Plaque Percentage Index and the number of tooth surfaces affected by caries (as measured by QLF). Qualitative study – an ethnography involving observations of 368 dental appointments and interviews with patients and dental teams. Results: Systematic review – the review identified 12 papers (nine of which were RCTs). Eight studies involved the use of computerised risk assessments in primary care. Intervention effects were generally modest, even with respect to modifying risk perceptions rather than altering behaviour or clinical outcomes. RCT – the trial found that 51% of patients identified verbal information as their most preferred form, 35% identified QLF as most preferred and 14% identified TL information as most preferred. The median WTP for TL was about half that for verbal information alone. Although at 6 and 12 months patients reported taking less sugar in drinks, and at 12 months patients reported longer toothbrushing, there was no difference by information group. Qualitative study – there was very little explicit risk talk. Lifestyle discussions were often cursory to avoid causing shame or embarrassment to patients. Limitations: Only 45% of patients were retained in the trial at 6 months and 31% were retained at 12 months. The trial was conducted in four dental practices, and five dental practices were involved in the qualitative work. Conclusions: Patients prefer personal, detailed verbal advice on oral health at their check-up. A new NHS dental practice contract using TL categorisation might make this less likely. Future work: Research on how to deliver, within time constraints, effective advice to patients on preventing poor oral health. More research on ‘risk work’ in wider clinical settings is also needed. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71242343. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr08030\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services and Delivery Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr08030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景:一项新的NHS牙科执业合同正在使用交通灯(TL)系统进行测试,该系统将患者分为口腔健康状况不佳的红色(高)、琥珀色(中)或绿色(低)风险。这是为了加强对预防性牙科的重视,包括为患者提供改善口腔健康的建议。定量光诱导荧光(QLF™)相机(荷兰阿姆斯特丹检验员研究系统BV)也可能提供患者口腔健康信息的生动写照。方法:系统评价-目的:调查患者对不同形式的健康风险信息的评价和反应。方法:电子检索9个数据库,手工检索8种专业期刊,前后追引,重复标题,摘要和论文筛选,数据提取。纳入标准将研究局限于作为其医疗保健的一部分给予患者的风险个性化信息。随机对照试验(RCT) -设置:NHS牙科实践。目的:探讨患者对不同形式的体检风险信息的偏好和反应。设计:实用、多中心、三臂、平行组、患者随机对照试验。参与者:参加NHS牙科诊所的口腔健康状况不佳的高/中等风险成年人。干预措施:(1)口头提供的信息,并附有一张显示患者TL风险类别的卡片;(2)口头给出的信息,并附有患者口腔的QLF照片。对照组仅提供口头信息(常规护理)。主要结果测量:主要结果-通过支付意愿(WTP)测量的三种信息形式的中位数估值。次要结果包括刷牙频率和持续时间、饮食糖摄入量、吸烟状况、自评口腔健康状况、基本牙周检查、菌斑百分比指数和受龋齿影响的牙齿表面数量(由QLF测量)。定性研究-一项涉及368次牙科预约观察和对患者和牙科团队访谈的人种志。结果:系统综述-纳入12篇文献(其中9篇为随机对照试验)。8项研究涉及在初级保健中使用计算机化风险评估。干预效果一般来说是适度的,即使是在改变风险认知方面,而不是改变行为或临床结果。随机对照试验-试验发现51%的患者认为口头信息是他们最喜欢的形式,35%的人认为QLF是最喜欢的,14%的人认为TL信息是最喜欢的。TL的中位WTP大约是单独的口头信息的一半。虽然在6个月和12个月时,患者报告在饮料中摄入较少的糖,在12个月时,患者报告更长时间的刷牙,但信息组之间没有差异。定性研究,很少有明确的风险谈话。生活方式的讨论通常是草率的,以避免给病人带来羞耻或尴尬。局限性:只有45%的患者在6个月时保留在试验中,31%的患者在12个月时保留。试验在四家牙科诊所进行,五家牙科诊所参与了定性工作。结论:患者在口腔健康检查中更倾向于个人的、详细的口头建议。使用TL分类的新的NHS牙科实践合同可能会使这种可能性降低。今后的工作:研究如何在时间限制内向患者提供有效的建议,以预防口腔健康不良。还需要在更广泛的临床环境中对“风险工作”进行更多的研究。试验注册:当前对照试验ISRCTN71242343。资助:该项目由国家卫生研究所(NIHR)卫生服务和交付研究方案资助,将全文发表在《卫生服务和交付研究》上;第八卷第三期请参阅NIHR期刊图书馆网站了解更多项目信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Presenting patients with information on their oral health risk: the PREFER three-arm RCT and ethnography
Background: A new NHS dental practice contract is being tested using a traffic light (TL) system that categorises patients as being at red (high), amber (medium) or green (low) risk of poor oral health. This is intended to increase the emphasis on preventative dentistry, including giving advice on ways patients can improve their oral health. Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence (QLF™) cameras (Inspektor Research Systems BV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) also potentially offer a vivid portrayal of information on patients’ oral health. Methods: Systematic review – objective: to investigate how patients value and respond to different forms of information on health risks. Methods: electronic searches of nine databases, hand-searching of eight specialist journals and backwards and forwards citation-chasing followed by duplicate title, abstract- and paper-screening and data-extraction. Inclusion criteria limited studies to personalised information on risk given to patients as part of their health care. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) – setting: NHS dental practice. Objective: to investigate patients’ preferences for and response to different forms of information about risk given at check-ups. Design: a pragmatic, multicentred, three-arm, parallel-group, patient RCT. Participants: adults with a high/medium risk of poor oral health attending NHS dental practices. Interventions: (1) information given verbally supported by a card showing the patient’s TL risk category; (2) information given verbally supported by a QLF photograph of the patient’s mouth. The control was verbal information only (usual care). Main outcome measures: primary outcome – median valuation for the three forms of information measured by willingness to pay (WTP). Secondary outcomes included toothbrushing frequency and duration, dietary sugar intake, smoking status, self-rated oral health, a basic periodontal examination, Plaque Percentage Index and the number of tooth surfaces affected by caries (as measured by QLF). Qualitative study – an ethnography involving observations of 368 dental appointments and interviews with patients and dental teams. Results: Systematic review – the review identified 12 papers (nine of which were RCTs). Eight studies involved the use of computerised risk assessments in primary care. Intervention effects were generally modest, even with respect to modifying risk perceptions rather than altering behaviour or clinical outcomes. RCT – the trial found that 51% of patients identified verbal information as their most preferred form, 35% identified QLF as most preferred and 14% identified TL information as most preferred. The median WTP for TL was about half that for verbal information alone. Although at 6 and 12 months patients reported taking less sugar in drinks, and at 12 months patients reported longer toothbrushing, there was no difference by information group. Qualitative study – there was very little explicit risk talk. Lifestyle discussions were often cursory to avoid causing shame or embarrassment to patients. Limitations: Only 45% of patients were retained in the trial at 6 months and 31% were retained at 12 months. The trial was conducted in four dental practices, and five dental practices were involved in the qualitative work. Conclusions: Patients prefer personal, detailed verbal advice on oral health at their check-up. A new NHS dental practice contract using TL categorisation might make this less likely. Future work: Research on how to deliver, within time constraints, effective advice to patients on preventing poor oral health. More research on ‘risk work’ in wider clinical settings is also needed. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71242343. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
53 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信