K M Buchanan1, K M Milsom, L Zoitopoulos, A Pau, M Tickle. 1. Oral Health Unit, National Primary Care R&D Centre, University of Manchester, Higher Cambridge Street, Manchester, M15 6LP/Halton & St Helens Primary Care Trust. katie.buchanan@manchester.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of a questionnaire-based assessment of dental pain delivered by non-dental prison nursing staff against a clinical examination performed by an experienced prison dentist (gold standard). SETTING: The research fieldwork took place in the healthcare department at HMP Brixton located in South London. METHODS: The cohort were those who had complained of dental/facial pain to the prison authorities and were therefore placed on the waiting list for emergency dental care. Subjects were asked to complete the screening test and were then clinically examined by trained and calibrated dentists. The screening test was in the form of a 12-item questionnaire designed to categorise a population reporting dental pain into one of three groups. The screening test results were compared with the diagnosis of a clinical examination. RESULTS: Ninety-six subjects were recruited during the 16-week study period. Of the 96 prisoners recruited, 27 of those failed to complete the screening test and/or the diagnostic examination even though they had reported pain previously. When sensitivity and specificity values were calculated for the 96 prisoners recruited, the sensitivity was fairly high (81%) and the specificity was poor (33%). However, when these values were calculated for the sub-population, those that completed both the screening test and diagnostic examination (n = 69), the sensitivity did not improve particularly (83%) but the specificity value fell substantially to 13%. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted the problems of conducting research in the prison environment, for example increased security preventing researchers from gaining access into the prison and general pressures on prison staff. Additionally, the study demonstrated that screening is not effective in local prisons with a high turnover of prisoners.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of a questionnaire-based assessment of dental pain delivered by non-dental prison nursing staff against a clinical examination performed by an experienced prison dentist (gold standard). SETTING: The research fieldwork took place in the healthcare department at HMP Brixton located in South London. METHODS: The cohort were those who had complained of dental/facial pain to the prison authorities and were therefore placed on the waiting list for emergency dental care. Subjects were asked to complete the screening test and were then clinically examined by trained and calibrated dentists. The screening test was in the form of a 12-item questionnaire designed to categorise a population reporting dental pain into one of three groups. The screening test results were compared with the diagnosis of a clinical examination. RESULTS: Ninety-six subjects were recruited during the 16-week study period. Of the 96 prisoners recruited, 27 of those failed to complete the screening test and/or the diagnostic examination even though they had reported pain previously. When sensitivity and specificity values were calculated for the 96 prisoners recruited, the sensitivity was fairly high (81%) and the specificity was poor (33%). However, when these values were calculated for the sub-population, those that completed both the screening test and diagnostic examination (n = 69), the sensitivity did not improve particularly (83%) but the specificity value fell substantially to 13%. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted the problems of conducting research in the prison environment, for example increased security preventing researchers from gaining access into the prison and general pressures on prison staff. Additionally, the study demonstrated that screening is not effective in local prisons with a high turnover of prisoners.