The effect of awareness on the outcome of oral health performed by home care service providers

What is it about carer-led oral hygiene interventions for people with intellectual disabilities that work and why? A realist review

OBJECTIVES

To undertake a realist review of carer-led oral hygiene interventions for people with intellectual disabilities. This was run parallel with a Cochrane Review.

METHODS

Realist review methods were followed. This was characterized by an iterative process of developing and refining theories of how interventions might work, expressed as context-mechanism-outcome configurations. The steps included identifying candidate theories with local and international expert consultation before applying an iterative search strategy. Selection criteria were applied for screening of the abstracts and 10% of the included full texts were screened by the three review members, independently, to ensure adherence to the criteria. Data were extracted in NVivo and synthesized qualitatively to confirm, refute or refine theories about what works, why, in what circumstances and for whom.

RESULTS

Of the 697 potential sources, 112 studies progressed to full-text screening, and 58 of those were included in the review. These 58 studies found evidence to support six theories about carer-led oral hygiene interventions for people with intellectual disabilities, from a starting point of ten candidate theories. This realist review found evidence to support the contention that, in order for carer-led oral hygiene interventions for people with ID to succeed, there is a need for adequate resources and a system-level approach; involving carers in design and implementation; tailoring of training to suit carers' needs and work environments; clearly stating how interventions are expected to work; specifying goals with achievable steps for carers to follow; providing carers with support and feedback on their efforts; acknowledging the physical and emotional toll caring for people with intellectual disabilities has on the well-being of carers; and repeating training.

CONCLUSIONS

The theories from this realist review will direct future interventions by suggesting the mechanisms and contexts that are important to achieve the intended outcome of improved oral health for people with intellectual disabilities. These are, of course, propositions intended for testing, rather than proven. The parallel use of Cochrane and realist methods provides a unique richness to our hypothesis of what works, for whom, when and how.

Barriers and facilitators for provision of oral health care in dependent older people: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Provision of oral health care (OHC), including oral hygiene (OH) or oral/dental treatment, to dependent older people (DOP) is frequently insufficient. We aimed to assess barriers and facilitators perceived by different healthcare professionals towards providing OHC to DOP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was performed. Studies reporting on knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs acting as barriers and facilitators for provision of OHC were included. One database (PubMed) was searched and data extraction independently performed by two reviewers. Thematic analysis was used and identified themes translated to the domains and constructs of the theoretical domains framework (TDF) and aligned with the domains of the behavior change wheel (BCW). Analyses were stratified for the two target behaviors (providing oral hygiene and providing oral/dental treatment) and according to different stakeholders' perspective. For quantitative analysis, frequency effect sizes (FES) were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 1621 articles were identified and 41 (32 quantitative, 7 qualitative, 2 mixed method) studies included. Within these 41 studies, there were 7333 participants (4367 formal caregivers, 67 informal caregivers, 1100 managers of care, 1322 dentists, 340 DOP). Main barriers for providing OH were "lack of knowledge" (FES 65%, COM-B domain: capability, TDF domain: knowledge) and "patients refusing care" (62%, opportunity, environmental context and resources). Main facilitators were "OHC training/education" (41%, capability, skills) and "presence of a dental professional" (21%, opportunity, environmental context and resources). Main barriers for provision of dental treatment were "lack of suitable facilities for treatment/transportation of patients" (76%) and "patients refusing care" (53%) (both: opportunity, environmental context and resources). Main facilitators were "regular visiting dentist" (35%) and "routine assessment/increased awareness by staff" (35%) (both: opportunity, environmental context and resources).

CONCLUSIONS

A number of barriers and facilitators for providing different aspects of OHC were identified for different stakeholders.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Our findings help provide the evidence to develop implementation strategies for providing high-quality systematic OHC to DOP.

REGISTRATION

This review was registered at Prospero (CRD42017056078).

Association Between Dentist-Dental Hygienist Communication and Dental Treatment Outcomes

Communication between physician and patient is critical in all fields of medicine, and various types of communication exist in healthcare settings. Cooperation among healthcare professionals is thought to be essential in providing high-quality services. Dental hygienists are key team members in the provision of dental care, and are known to play an important role in the health of their patients. This study aimed to determine the effect of communication between dentists and hygienists on patient satisfaction. Study subjects were dentists, patients, and dental hygienists, and we examined how dentist-dental hygienist communication affected patient outcome indices. A significant difference was observed only for satisfaction in terms of meeting expectations (p = 0.035). Results for patient satisfaction indicated significant differences in explanatory behavior in dentist-dental hygienist evaluations (p = 0.001). The results showed improved health and reduced fear, indicating significant differences for the dentist-dental hygienist evaluations in explanation behavior (p = 0.016). Our evaluation of the effects of dentist-dental hygienist communication on patient outcomes indicated a significant correlation, suggesting that inter-professional communication in the field of dentistry affects patient satisfaction.