Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41947618›Full record

ArticleSpecial care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry

Evaluation of the Concurrent Validity of the Oral Health Screening Tool (OHS) in the Mental Health Care Setting: A Pilot Study.

Evandro Siqueira Pires, Johanna de Almeida Mello, Joke Duyck, Elton Ferlin, Alice Hirdes, John Hirdes, Pedro Antonio Gonzales Hernandez

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Evandro Siqueira PiresDepartamento de Odontologia, Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Porto Alegre, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4342-2283
Johanna de Almeida MelloDepartment of Oral Health Sciences, KU LEUVEN, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1262-318X
Joke DuyckDepartment of Oral Health Sciences, KU LEUVEN, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4551-9300
Elton FerlinDiretoria de Pesquisa, Hospital De Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4278-1031
Alice HirdesPós-Graduação em Enfermagem, Universidade Federal de Rio Grande, Rio Grande, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3318-0514
John HirdesSchool of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9619-6543
Pedro Antonio Gonzales HernandezDepartamento de Odontologia, Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Porto Alegre, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8203-3927

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe prevalence of oral health problems in people with mental health disorders and addictions is significantly higher than in the general population. Timely and regular assessment of their oral health is therefore important to prevent or stop their oral health deterioration. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the Oral Health Screener for use within interRAI (OHS) accurately detects oral health care needs people in the mental health care setting in Brazil compared to the gold standard instrument for assessing oral health, the SB BRASIL 2020. METHODS AND

resultsThis is a cross-sectional pilot study performed at the Mental Health unit of the University Hospital of the University Hospital of Canoas, Rio Grande do Sul, in the South of Brazil. Admitted patients with severe mental disorders and addictions were included, according to the inclusion criteria. First the OHS was translated and adapted to the Brazilian mental health care context. Secondly, the patients' oral health was screened by a dentist using the OHS as well as the SB BRASIL 2020. Scores of the OHS were compared with the scores of selected corresponding items of the SB BRASIL 2020 to calculate sensitivity, specificity, predictive validity and ROC analysis of the OHS. A total of 44 participants were included (mean age 37.5 ± 14.2, 54.6% female), of which 39% had addiction problems, 16% had bipolar disorder, and 14% depression disorder as their primary diagnosis. The items' pain and oral hygiene showed large predictive accuracy with respectively 0.82 ±0.06 and 0.85 ± 0.08. The pain item showed the best results for sensitivity (90.9%), followed by the item oral hygiene (89.47%), and condition of the teeth (75.8%). No conclusive results were found for the items palate and tongue problems, as these conditions were barely present in the sample.

conclusionThe OHS presented high sensitivity and specificity and the application of this tool in the mental health care setting can bring an added value to clinical practice, as it is much shorter and hence more feasible to be used in the daily care for people with mental disorders and addictions. A valid screening tool for oral health in the mental health care setting can help caregivers detect people with oral disease or at risk for oral health problems. This allows targeted preventive measures, such as better oral hygiene practices and referrals to dental professionals.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningMental DisordersOral HealthAdultBrazilCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41947618
PMCPMC13058508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.