Page 63

Oral hygiene instructions: Therapist provision of oral hygiene instruction was formally observed and recorded seven times at two sites (Table 4-30). No deficiencies were noted. Because the oral examinations were always done in close proximity to where the therapist was working—typically an adjacent operatory—multiple informal observations of chairside manner were made by the project dental examiner across all sites. The examiner reported noticing no deficiencies in these interactions. Table 4-30. Oral Hygiene Instruction Observation Yes

No

Demonstrated skill to patient

7

0

Supervised as patient demonstrated skill

7

0

Asked multiple questions about oral health behaviors

7

0

Engaged patient in discussion of oral health, as opposed to lecturing

7

0

Praised some aspect of patient performance

7

0

Frequency: 7 observations, two sites

Criticized some aspect of patient performance

0

7

Used threats of dire consequences of poor oral health

0

7

4.4

Performance Measures

The performance measures reported here were calculated to reflect a variety of aspects of the performance of a site’s dental program, including the effectiveness of the care provided, its composition, focus, and intensity, and complications arising from two common procedures. These measures reflect the characteristics of the dental practice at the site and should not be construed as attributable to the performance of a specific therapist. Similar to the measures of technical performance, there are no widely accepted norms for these performance measures. The information was collected to establish baseline information for ANTHC for future comparison as the implementation of the therapist model moves forward. Note also that these performance measures reflect care provided to patients who made a visit to the site clinic in each of the preceding 2 years. Site residents without such a visit history are not part of the patient population for whom the program’s performance was evaluated.

4.4.1 Effectiveness of Care Measures (Table 4-31) Disease assessment: Three sites assigned caries risk-level assessments to large majorities of their child patients (6 to 17 years of age), and two of these sites were also reasonably effective in assigning caries and periodontal risk levels to adult patients (18 years of age or older). Two sites made little or no attempt to record risk assessments. 4-23

/Alaska_DHAT_Program_Evaluation_Final_10_25_10  

http://vtoralhealth4all.org/downloads/Alaska_DHAT_Program_Evaluation_Final_10_25_10.pdf

/Alaska_DHAT_Program_Evaluation_Final_10_25_10  

http://vtoralhealth4all.org/downloads/Alaska_DHAT_Program_Evaluation_Final_10_25_10.pdf

Advertisement