Ingeborg S Simpelaere1,2,3, Gwen Van Nuffelen4, Jan Vanderwegen5, Kristien Wouters6,7, Marc De Bodt4,8. 1. VIVES University College, Bruges, Belgium. 2. Department Speech-Language Pathology, AZ Delta Hospital, Menen, Belgium. 3. University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. 4. Department of Otolaryngology and Rehabilitation Centre for Communication Disorders, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium. 5. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Saint-Pierre University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium. 6. Department of Scientific Coordination and Biostatistics, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium. 7. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. 8. Department of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and reliability of the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT) as used by speech pathologists, to become part of a comprehensive clinical swallowing examination. METHODS: A multicentre study in 132 elderly subjects was conducted by speech pathologists. The inter-rater, test-retest and intra-rater reliabilities of the OHAT were assessed in R statistics, version 3.0.1. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used for the total OHAT, and Kappa statistics were used for the individual categories. RESULTS: Total OHAT scores showed good inter-rater (ICC = 0.96), intra-rater (ICC ≥ 0.95) and test-retest (ICC ≥ 0.78) agreement. The inter-rater Kappa statistics were almost perfect (κ ≥ 0.83) for seven of the eight individual categories of the OHAT and perfect for 'dental pain' (κ = 1.00). The test-retest Kappa statistics indicated excellent agreement for 'natural teeth' and 'dentures' (κ ≥ 0.86). The intra-rater per cent agreement was excellent for all categories except 'gums and tissues'. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine the feasibility and reliability of the OHAT as used by speech pathologists. As the results showed both good feasibility and reliability, the OHAT has the potential to add to the clinical swallowing examination. However, future research investigating actual referral strategies and adaptation of care strategies following assessment with OHAT is needed.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and reliability of the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT) as used by speech pathologists, to become part of a comprehensive clinical swallowing examination. METHODS: A multicentre study in 132 elderly subjects was conducted by speech pathologists. The inter-rater, test-retest and intra-rater reliabilities of the OHAT were assessed in R statistics, version 3.0.1. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used for the total OHAT, and Kappa statistics were used for the individual categories. RESULTS: Total OHAT scores showed good inter-rater (ICC = 0.96), intra-rater (ICC ≥ 0.95) and test-retest (ICC ≥ 0.78) agreement. The inter-rater Kappa statistics were almost perfect (κ ≥ 0.83) for seven of the eight individual categories of the OHAT and perfect for 'dental pain' (κ = 1.00). The test-retest Kappa statistics indicated excellent agreement for 'natural teeth' and 'dentures' (κ ≥ 0.86). The intra-rater per cent agreement was excellent for all categories except 'gums and tissues'. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine the feasibility and reliability of the OHAT as used by speech pathologists. As the results showed both good feasibility and reliability, the OHAT has the potential to add to the clinical swallowing examination. However, future research investigating actual referral strategies and adaptation of care strategies following assessment with OHAT is needed.
Authors: Susan O Griffin; Judith A Jones; Diane Brunson; Paul M Griffin; William D Bailey Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Babette Everaars; Linet F Weening-Verbree; Katarina Jerković-Ćosić; Linda Schoonmade; Nienke Bleijenberg; Niek J de Wit; Geert J M G van der Heijden Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2020-01-03 Impact factor: 3.921