Sheryl Zimmerman1,2, Sophie Austin3, Lauren Cohen4, David Reed1, Patricia Poole1, Kimberly Ward1, Philip D Sloane1,5. 1. Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 2. School of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 3. East Carolina University, Brody School of Medicine, Greenville, North Carolina. 4. Duke Clinical Research Institute, School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Department of Family Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The poor oral hygiene of nursing home (NH) residents is a matter of increasing concern, especially because of its relationship with pneumonia and other health events. Because details and related risk factors in this area are scant and providers need to be able to easily identify those residents at most risk, this study comprehensively examined the plaque, gingival, and denture status of NH residents, as well as readily available correlates of those indicators of oral hygiene, including items from the Minimum Data Set (MDS). DESIGN: Oral hygiene assessment and chart abstract conducted on a cross-section of NH residents. SETTING: NHs in North Carolina (N = 14). PARTICIPANTS: NH residents (N = 506). MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive data from the MDS and assessments using three standardized measures: the Plaque Index for Long-Term Care (PI-LTC), the Gingival Index for Long-Term Care (GI-LTC), and the Denture Plaque Index (DPI). RESULTS: Oral hygiene scores averaged 1.7 (of 3) for the PI-LTC, 1.5 (of 4) for the GI-LTC, and 2.2 (of 4) for the DPI. Factors most strongly associated with poor oral hygiene scores included having dementia, being on hospice care, and longer stay. MDS ratings of gingivitis differed significantly from oral hygiene assessments. CONCLUSIONS: The findings identify resident subgroups at especially high risk of poor oral health who can be targeted in quality improvement efforts related to oral hygiene; they also indicate need to improve the accuracy of how MDS items are completed.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The poor oral hygiene of nursing home (NH) residents is a matter of increasing concern, especially because of its relationship with pneumonia and other health events. Because details and related risk factors in this area are scant and providers need to be able to easily identify those residents at most risk, this study comprehensively examined the plaque, gingival, and denture status of NH residents, as well as readily available correlates of those indicators of oral hygiene, including items from the Minimum Data Set (MDS). DESIGN: Oral hygiene assessment and chart abstract conducted on a cross-section of NH residents. SETTING: NHs in North Carolina (N = 14). PARTICIPANTS: NH residents (N = 506). MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive data from the MDS and assessments using three standardized measures: the Plaque Index for Long-Term Care (PI-LTC), the Gingival Index for Long-Term Care (GI-LTC), and the Denture Plaque Index (DPI). RESULTS: Oral hygiene scores averaged 1.7 (of 3) for the PI-LTC, 1.5 (of 4) for the GI-LTC, and 2.2 (of 4) for the DPI. Factors most strongly associated with poor oral hygiene scores included having dementia, being on hospice care, and longer stay. MDS ratings of gingivitis differed significantly from oral hygiene assessments. CONCLUSIONS: The findings identify resident subgroups at especially high risk of poor oral health who can be targeted in quality improvement efforts related to oral hygiene; they also indicate need to improve the accuracy of how MDS items are completed.
Authors: Sheryl Zimmerman; Philip D Sloane; Kimberly Ward; Christopher J Wretman; Sally C Stearns; Patricia Poole; John S Preisser Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-06-01
Authors: Stefano Cianetti; Chiara Valenti; Massimiliano Orso; Giuseppe Lomurno; Michele Nardone; Anna Palma Lomurno; Stefano Pagano; Guido Lombardo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-24 Impact factor: 3.390