Disability and health journal · 2021
Development of a new tool for predicting the behavior of individuals with intellectual disability in the dental office: A pilot study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Varela Iván, Fernández-Feijoo Javier, García Eliane, Diniz-Freitas Márcio, Martínez Isabel, Roca Javier, Diz Pedro, Limeres Jacobo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The dental treatment of individuals with intellectual disability can represent a considerable professional challenge.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a model for predicting the behavior of patients with intellectual disability in the dental office.
METHODS: The study group comprised 250 patients with Down syndrome (DS), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), cerebral palsy (CP), idiopathic cognitive impairment or rare disorders. We collected their demographic, medical, social and behavioral information and identified potential predictors (chi-squared test). We developed stratified models (Akaike information criterion) to anticipate the patients'behavior during intraoral examinations and to discern whether the dental treatment should be performed under general anesthesia. These models were validated in a new study group consisting of 80 patients. Goodness of fit was quantified with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). We developed a mathematical algorithm for executing the models and developed software for its practical implementation (PREdictors of BEhavior in Dentistry, "PREBED").
RESULTS: For patients with DS, ASD and CP, the model predicting the need for physical restraint during examination achieved a PPV of 0.90, 0.85 and 1.00, respectively, and an NPV of 0.66, 0.76 and 1.00, respectively. The model predicting the need for performing treatment under general anesthesia achieved a PPV of 0.63, 1.00 and 1.00, respectively, and an NPV of 1.00, 1.00 and 0.73, respectively. However, when validating the stratified models, the percentage of poorly classified individuals (false negatives + false positives) ranged from 24% to 46.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the PREBED tool open the door to establishing new models implementing other potentially predictive variables.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a model for predicting the behavior of patients with intellectual disability in the dental office.
METHODS: The study group comprised 250 patients with Down syndrome (DS), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), cerebral palsy (CP), idiopathic cognitive impairment or rare disorders. We collected their demographic, medical, social and behavioral information and identified potential predictors (chi-squared test). We developed stratified models (Akaike information criterion) to anticipate the patients'behavior during intraoral examinations and to discern whether the dental treatment should be performed under general anesthesia. These models were validated in a new study group consisting of 80 patients. Goodness of fit was quantified with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). We developed a mathematical algorithm for executing the models and developed software for its practical implementation (PREdictors of BEhavior in Dentistry, "PREBED").
RESULTS: For patients with DS, ASD and CP, the model predicting the need for physical restraint during examination achieved a PPV of 0.90, 0.85 and 1.00, respectively, and an NPV of 0.66, 0.76 and 1.00, respectively. The model predicting the need for performing treatment under general anesthesia achieved a PPV of 0.63, 1.00 and 1.00, respectively, and an NPV of 1.00, 1.00 and 0.73, respectively. However, when validating the stratified models, the percentage of poorly classified individuals (false negatives + false positives) ranged from 24% to 46.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the PREBED tool open the door to establishing new models implementing other potentially predictive variables.