Development of an Oral Assessment Sheet for Evaluating Older Adults in Nursing Homes

Oral Health Assessment Tools for Elderly Adults: A Scoping Review

Purpose

The aim of this study was to synthesize the Oral Health Assessment Tool for elderly adults and determine its psychosocial properties.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review. The Arkey and O'Malley methodology was employed to conduct scoping reviews involving the exploration of both national and international databases, as well as a manual search of the reference lists of the selected studies. We focused on oral health assessment tools for elderly adults (>60 years). The review report adhered to the standards outlined in the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The study protocol was officially filed with the Open Science Framework.

Results

A total of 19 documents were included. The literature search included a time frame ranging from 1995 to 2023 and covered a diverse range of 13 countries. Of the 19 assessment tools examined, it was found that only the Oral Assessment Sheet had multidimensional characteristics, while the remaining tools were unidimensional in nature. The evaluation of oral health assessment tools was conducted across several contexts, including nursing homes, geriatric facilities, communities, and hospitals. A total of eleven studies underwent reliability testing, whereas two studies were alone validated for validity and did not undergo reliability testing. Additionally, seven studies were exclusively validated for reliability and did not undergo validity testing.

Conclusion

Multidimensional oral health assessment tools for elderly adults that integrate social and psychological aspects need to be developed and validated. It is necessary to develop oral health assessment tools based on hospitalized elderly patients to meet the oral and dental health needs of elderly patients.

A systematic review of measurement instruments for oral health assessment of older adults in long-term care facilities by nondental professionals

BACKGROUND

Regular oral health assessment of older adults living in Long-term Care Facilities (LTCF) can improve their oral health.

AIMS

This study aimed to systematically review studies describing the development of instruments employed by nondental professionals to assess the oral health of older adults in LTCF and to evaluate their measurement properties.

MATERIAL & METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted in the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and LILACS databases. Measurement properties of the identified instruments were evaluated using the Consensus-based Standards to select health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Studies assessing at least one measurement property (validity, reliability, or responsiveness) of instruments used to assess oral health of older adults living in LTCF by nondental professionals were considered. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) checklist was used to evaluate the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies reporting measurement properties of seven instruments were selected. The ohr-interRAI and the OHAT were considered to have sufficient content validity, with high and moderate evidence quality, respectively. OHAT, BOHSE, and DHI showed acceptable results on reliability but with very low quality of evidence. DHI and OHSTNP also showed acceptable results for criterion validity, but, with low quality of evidence, insufficient or unclear results were observed for the remaining measurement properties. Studies evaluating the validity criteria of BOHSE and hypotheses testing of ohr-MDS were considered to have high evidence quality.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The ohr-interRAI can be provisionally recommended for use until further evidence is provided. Further methodologically rigorous studies are needed to assess the measurement properties of the existing instruments.

Measurement properties, interpretability and feasibility of instruments measuring oral health and orofacial pain in dependent adults: a systematic review

Background

Dependent adults have been shown to have a greater experience of oral health deterioration and orofacial pain. This is partly because their non-dental caregivers may not easily identify oral health problems and orofacial pain experienced by them. Thus, this systematic review aimed to investigate measurement properties, interpretability and feasibility of instruments assessing oral health and orofacial pain in dependent adults, which can be used by the non-dental caregivers to establish oral care plans for those who are dependent upon them.

Methods

Seven bibliographic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, HTA, OATD and OpenGrey. Citations and reference lists of the included studies were also manually searched. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts, and then full texts. A quality assessment of included studies was conducted independently by two authors using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. The best evidence synthesis method was used to synthesise results from different studies for each measurement property per measurement instrument by integrating the overall rating for each measurement property per measurement instrument with its quality level of evidence.

Results

Nineteen eligible studies were included, which reported the development, measurement properties’ evaluation, interpretability and feasibility of nine oral health and three orofacial pain measurement instruments. Methodological quality of the included studies ranged from very good to inadequate. None of the identified measurement instruments has been adequately and comprehensively tested.

Conclusions

While several measurement instruments were identified in this systematic review, more evidence is needed to be able to more comprehensively evaluate these instruments. Among those identified, the OPS-NVI demonstrated sufficient construct validity, while the OHAT and the THROAT demonstrated sufficient reliability. These instruments therefore have potential for future use with more confidence once other measurement properties, interpretability and feasibility have been sufficiently tested and evaluated.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-022-02235-w.

The development and psychometric properties of oral health assessment instruments used by non-dental professionals for nursing home residents: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Globally, oral health status of the geriatric population residing in nursing homes is poor. The integration of non-dental professionals is vital to monitor oral health, early identification and triaging of oral health problems, and timely referral to dental professionals. The aims of this systematic review were to provide a summary on the development and characteristics of oral health assessment instruments currently used by non-dental professionals for nursing home residents, and to perform a critical appraisal of their psychometric properties.

METHODS

This review was conducted as per the PRISMA guidelines. CINHAL (EBSCO), Medline (Ovid), and EMBASE (Ovid) were searched systematically. Two reviewers independently screened the title, abstract, and full text of the studies as per the eligibility criteria. Studies describing oral health assessment instruments used to assess oral health of nursing home residents by non-dental professionals were included. Using a methodological framework, each instrument was evaluated for purpose, content, and psychometric properties related to validity, reliability, feasibility, generalisability, and responsiveness. Additionally, the reporting quality assessment of each included study was performed according to the SURGE guidelines.

RESULTS

Out of the 819 screened articles, 10 studies were included in this review. The 10 identified instruments integrated 2 to 12 categories to assess oral health, which was scored on a 2 to 5-point scale. However, the measurement content varied widely, and none were able to comprehensively measure all aspects of oral health. Three measurement approaches were identified: performance- based assessment, direct inspection of the oral health status, and interview measures. Only eight instruments provided quality assessment on the basis of validity, reliability, feasibility and generalisability, whereas three instruments- Brief Oral Health Status Examination, Dental Hygiene Registration, and Oral Health Assessment Tool reported good methodological quality on at least one assessment criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the instruments identified in this review provided a comprehensive assessment of oral health, while three instruments appeared to be valid and reliable. Nonetheless, continuous development of instruments is essential to embrace the complete spectrum of oral health and address the psychometric gaps.

Measurement properties of oral health assessments for non-dental healthcare professionals in older people: a systematic review

Background

Regular inspection of the oral cavity is required for prevention, early diagnosis and risk reduction of oral- and general health-related problems. Assessments to inspect the oral cavity have been designed for non-dental healthcare professionals, like nurses. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the content and the measurement properties of oral health assessments for use by non-dental healthcare professionals in assessing older peoples’ oral health, in order to provide recommendations for practice, policy, and research.

Methods

A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE.com, and Cinahl (via Ebsco) has been performed. Search terms referring to ‘oral health assessments^’, ‘non-dental healthcare professionals’ and ‘older people (60+)’ were used. Two reviewers individually performed title/abstract, and full-text screening for eligibility. The included studies have investigated at least one measurement property (validity/reliability) and were evaluated on their methodological quality using “The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments” (COSMIN) checklist. The measurement properties were then scored using quality criteria (positive/negative/indeterminate).

Results

Out of 879 hits, 18 studies were included in this review. Five studies showed good methodological quality on at least one measurement property and 14 studies showed poor methodological quality on some of their measurement properties. None of the studies assessed all measurement properties of the COSMIN. In total eight oral health assessments were found: the Revised Oral Assessment Guide (ROAG); the Minimum Data Set (MDS), with oral health component; the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT); The Holistic Reliable Oral Assessment Tool (THROAT); Dental Hygiene Registration (DHR); Mucosal Plaque Score (MPS); The Brief Oral Health Screening Examination (BOHSE) and the Oral Assessment Sheet (OAS). Most frequently assessed items were: lips, mucosa membrane, tongue, gums, teeth, denture, saliva, and oral hygiene.

Conclusion

Taken into account the scarce evidence of the proposed assessments, the OHAT and ROAG are most complete in their included oral health items and are of best methodological quality in combination with positive quality criteria on their measurement properties. Non-dental healthcare professionals, policymakers and researchers should be aware of the methodological limitations of the available oral health assessments and realize that the quality of the measurement properties remains uncertain.

Survey on Nursing Home Caregivers' Basic Knowledge of Oral Health Management: Dental Terminology

With the increasing numbers of the elderly requiring care in Japan, the management of their oral health care will require cooperation between medical and dental professionals, and we need to transfer dental knowledge from dental professionals to caregivers. With the help of a questionnaire, we examined 181 caregivers' depth of understanding regarding 20 typical dental terms with a view to improving the educational instruction provided to them. It was found that except for "clasp", popular dental terms have largely been accepted. The differences in their degrees of understanding could be owing to the lack of systematic education for caregivers.