OBJECTIVE: A pilot study to measure the validity of using a hygienist to carry out school screening. DESIGN: Following a standard training programme a dental hygienist (DH), recruited from general practice, a newly appointed dental officer (DO) and an epidemiologist (SDO), who acted as the standard, all screened the same group of school children on two occasions. SETTING: An inner city school with known high levels of disease. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-eight 7- and 8-year-old children attending school. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each clinician the levels of referral, the reasons for referral and the repeatability were measured. RESULTS: The hygienist referred 26 children (27%) for further examination while the DO and the SDO both referred 61 (62%). The DO achieved the required standards of sensitivity and specificity when results were compared with the SDO but the hygienist did not. Intra-examiner reliability in all three clinicians was good. CONCLUSIONS: The standard training programme used to prepare dental officers to carry out school screening to an agreed standard was insufficient for this hygienist's needs.
OBJECTIVE: A pilot study to measure the validity of using a hygienist to carry out school screening. DESIGN: Following a standard training programme a dental hygienist (DH), recruited from general practice, a newly appointed dental officer (DO) and an epidemiologist (SDO), who acted as the standard, all screened the same group of school children on two occasions. SETTING: An inner city school with known high levels of disease. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-eight 7- and 8-year-old children attending school. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each clinician the levels of referral, the reasons for referral and the repeatability were measured. RESULTS: The hygienist referred 26 children (27%) for further examination while the DO and the SDO both referred 61 (62%). The DO achieved the required standards of sensitivity and specificity when results were compared with the SDO but the hygienist did not. Intra-examiner reliability in all three clinicians was good. CONCLUSIONS: The standard training programme used to prepare dental officers to carry out school screening to an agreed standard was insufficient for this hygienist's needs.