Dataset Information

Validation of Universal Scale in Oral Surgery (USOS) for Patient's Psycho-emotional Status Rating.

ABSTRACT: Objectives:There aren't any objective methods that may help in standard evaluation of oral surgery patient's psycho-emotional status. Without any standardized evaluation, two main problems appear: heterogeneity between studies and ineffective patient's evaluation. Therefore, Universal Scale in Oral Surgery (USOS) for patient's psycho-emotional status rating has previously been proposed by authors. The aim of present study is to assess the clinical effectivity and validate the Universal Scale in Oral Surgery in case of outpatient tooth extraction for adult healthy patients. Material and Methods:Clinical trial to validate the USOS for patient's psycho-emotional status rating was performed. In total 90 patients, that came for outpatient dental extraction to Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department ambulatory, were enrolled in clinical trial. Patients filled self-reported questionnaires before the procedure. Operating surgeon rated USOS for patient's psycho-emotional status rating doctor's part questionnaire after the procedure. 4 - 6 weeks later all patients were asked to fill USOS for patient's psycho-emotional status rating questionnaire retrospectively. Results:According to the statistical analysis, the final composition of USOS for patient's psycho-emotional status rating that would fit to reliability coefficient should be composed from 6 patient part questions and 3 general doctor part questions. Conclusions:Universal Scale in Oral Surgery for patient's psycho-emotional status rating is a novel, doctor and patient rated scale which is suitable for clinical and scientific usage.

SUBMITTER: Astramskaite I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5806039 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of Universal Scale in Oral Surgery (USOS) for Patient's Psycho-emotional Status Rating.

Astramskaite Inesa I Pinchasov Ginnady G Gervickas Albinas A Sakavicius Dalius D Juodzbalys Gintaras G

Journal of oral & maxillofacial research 20171001 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>There aren't any objective methods that may help in standard evaluation of oral surgery patient's psycho-emotional status. Without any standardized evaluation, two main problems appear: heterogeneity between studies and ineffective patient's evaluation. Therefore, Universal Scale in Oral Surgery (USOS) for patient's psycho-emotional status rating has previously been proposed by authors. The aim of present study is to assess the clinical effectivity and validate the Universal S ...[more]

PMID: 29435204

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMobile health apps (MHA) have the potential to improve health care. The commercial MHA market is rapidly growing, but the content and quality of available MHA are unknown. Instruments for the assessment of the quality and content of MHA are highly needed. The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) is one of the most widely used tools to evaluate the quality of MHA. Only few validation studies investigated its metric quality. No study has evaluated the construct validity and concurrent validity.ObjectiveThis study evaluates the construct validity, concurrent validity, reliability, and objectivity, of the MARS.MethodsData was pooled from 15 international app quality reviews to evaluate the metric properties of the MARS. The MARS measures app quality across four dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics and information quality. Construct validity was evaluated by assessing related competing confirmatory models by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Non-centrality (RMSEA), incremental (CFI, TLI) and residual (SRMR) fit indices were used to evaluate the goodness of fit. As a measure of concurrent validity, the correlations to another quality assessment tool (ENLIGHT) were investigated. Reliability was determined using Omega. Objectivity was assessed by intra-class correlation.ResultsIn total, MARS ratings from 1,299 MHA covering 15 different health domains were included. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a bifactor model with a general factor and a factor for each dimension (RMSEA = 0.074, TLI = 0.922, CFI = 0.940, SRMR = 0.059). Reliability was good to excellent (Omega 0.79 to 0.93). Objectivity was high (ICC = 0.82). MARS correlated with ENLIGHT (ps<.05).ConclusionThe metric evaluation of the MARS demonstrated its suitability for the quality assessment. As such, the MARS could be used to make the quality of MHA transparent to health care stakeholders and patients. Future studies could extend the present findings by investigating the re-test reliability and predictive validity of the MARS.

Project description:BackgroundThe Movement Disorder Society-sponsored Nonmotor Rating Scale is an update of the existing Parkinson's disease Nonmotor Symptoms Scale modified to address some limitations in Nonmotor Symptoms Scale scoring, structure, and symptom coverage.MethodsPD patients were recruited from movement disorder centers in an international, multicenter study. The Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale, consisting of 13 domains plus a subscale for nonmotor fluctuations, was rater administered, along with the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale and other clinical assessments. Standard reliability and validity testing were conducted.ResultsFour hundred and two PD patients were recruited (mean age?±?standard deviation, 67.42?±?9.96 years; mean age at PD onset ± standard deviation, 59.27?±?10.67?years; median Hoehn and Yahr stage 2 (interquartile range 2-3). Data quality was satisfactory for all Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale domains except sexual (6.7% missing data). There were no floor or ceiling effects for the Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale and nonmotor fluctuations total score; domains had no ceiling effects, but some floor effects (13.5%-83.5%). The Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale and nonmotor fluctuations total score internal consistency were acceptable (average Cronbach's alpha, 0.66 and 0.84, respectively); interrater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, >0.95); for test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.84 for the Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale and 0.70 for Movement Disorder Society nonmotor fluctuations total score, and precision was excellent for the Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale (standard error of measurement, 25.30) and fair for nonmotor fluctuations (standard error of measurement, 7.06). Correlations between Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale score and the corresponding Nonmotor Symptoms Scale and Movement Disorder Society UPDRS scores were high. There were no significant sex or age effects. The Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale score increased with increasing PD duration, disease severity, and PD medication dose (all P?<?0.001).ConclusionsThe Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale is a valid measure for measuring the burden of a wide range of Nonmotor Rating Scale scores, including nonmotor fluctuations, in PD patients. © 2019 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Project description:Background: Oromandibular dystonia manifests with sustained or task-specific contractions of the masticatory, tongue, and/or other muscles in the stomatognathic system. Since its symptoms can vary, it has been difficult to objectively measure disease severity and post-treatment changes. Objective: To develop and validate a comprehensive measurement tool for oromandibular dystonia. Methods: An examiner-rated scale included three subscales for severity, disability, and pain, modified specifically for oromandibular dystonia from the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale-2. To evaluate the severity of each subtype of oromandibular dystonia, four of the six items were selected according to the subtype (jaw closing dystonia, tongue dystonia, jaw opening dystonia, jaw deviation [protrusion] dystonia, and lip dystonia). A patient-administered questionnaire based on clinical features and other relevant aspects associated with oromandibular dystonia was developed, which included five subscales: general, eating, speech, cosmetic, and social/family life. The questionnaire, examiner-rated scale, and four subscales (sleep, annoyance, mood, and psychosocial functioning) of the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile-58 were combined to construct the oromandibular dystonia rating scale (OMDRS). The reliability and validity of the scale were assessed using clinimetric testing. Results: Six hundred and eighteen patients with oromandibular dystonia (394 women and 224 men; mean age, 51.7 years) were evaluated by the OMDRS. The overall OMDRS showed high-level internal consistency measured by Cronbach's alpha (0.95) with a logical factor structure. Cronbach's alpha for the subscales was satisfactory to excellent, ranging from 0.72 to 0.94. All items revealed acceptable inter-rater reliability (kappa > 0.4, interclass correlation coefficient > 0.6). Repeated ratings of videotapes revealed acceptable intra-rater reliability for all items (kappa > 0.76, interclass correlation coefficient > 0.86). Test-retest reliability showed a significant (p < 0.001) correlation efficiency. The OMDRS showed significant (p < 0.001) convergent and discriminant validity and significant (p < 0.001) sensitivity to changes after botulinum toxin therapy. Conclusion: The OMDRS can be useful for the comprehensive evaluation of disease severity, disability, psychosocial functioning, and impact on the quality of life as well as therapeutic changes in patients with oromandibular dystonia.

Dataset Information

Validation of Universal Scale in Oral Surgery (USOS) for Patient's Psycho-emotional Status Rating.

Publications

Validation of Universal Scale in Oral Surgery (USOS) for Patient's Psycho-emotional Status Rating.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets