Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

A study to assess the validity of clinical judgement in determining paediatric dental anxiety and related outcomes of management.
Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005 May; 15(3):169-76.IJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to determine the validity of subjective anxiety assessment and the outcomes of management of children receiving operative dental treatment.

SETTING

The study was conducted at the Departments of Sedation and Child Dental Health, Newcastle Dental Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

One hundred children and adolescents aged between 8 and 15 years participated in the study. Clinicians subjectively allocated 50 children for treatment with local analgesia alone (low anxiety), and identified 50 children who had the potential to benefit from nitrous oxide and oxygen sedation (high anxiety). Participants then completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC), the Venham Picture Test (VPT) and the Child Fear Survey Schedule-Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS). A global rating scale classified behaviour during dental treatment.

RESULTS

State anxiety and dental fear prior to treatment were significantly higher in children allocated to receive inhalation sedation (P = 0.004 and P = 0.005, respectively). There was no significant difference in trait anxiety or post-treatment state anxiety between the two groups (P = 0.69 and P = 0.06, respectively). Only 11% displayed 'negative' behaviour during treatment: 82% of this group represented those allocated to receive sedation.

CONCLUSION

Children receiving inhalation sedation were significantly more anxious prior to treatment than children receiving treatment with local analgesia alone. The findings support the subjective assessment of anxiety in children; however, objective anxiety measures may assist clinicians in identifying specific fears, which may ultimately aid patient management.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Sedation, School of Dental Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.No affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

15854112

Citation

Holmes, R D., and N M. Girdler. "A Study to Assess the Validity of Clinical Judgement in Determining Paediatric Dental Anxiety and Related Outcomes of Management." International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, vol. 15, no. 3, 2005, pp. 169-76.
Holmes RD, Girdler NM. A study to assess the validity of clinical judgement in determining paediatric dental anxiety and related outcomes of management. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005;15(3):169-76.
Holmes, R. D., & Girdler, N. M. (2005). A study to assess the validity of clinical judgement in determining paediatric dental anxiety and related outcomes of management. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, 15(3), 169-76.
Holmes RD, Girdler NM. A Study to Assess the Validity of Clinical Judgement in Determining Paediatric Dental Anxiety and Related Outcomes of Management. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005;15(3):169-76. PubMed PMID: 15854112.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - A study to assess the validity of clinical judgement in determining paediatric dental anxiety and related outcomes of management. AU - Holmes,R D, AU - Girdler,N M, PY - 2005/4/28/pubmed PY - 2005/6/9/medline PY - 2005/4/28/entrez SP - 169 EP - 76 JF - International journal of paediatric dentistry JO - Int J Paediatr Dent VL - 15 IS - 3 N2 - OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to determine the validity of subjective anxiety assessment and the outcomes of management of children receiving operative dental treatment. SETTING: The study was conducted at the Departments of Sedation and Child Dental Health, Newcastle Dental Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred children and adolescents aged between 8 and 15 years participated in the study. Clinicians subjectively allocated 50 children for treatment with local analgesia alone (low anxiety), and identified 50 children who had the potential to benefit from nitrous oxide and oxygen sedation (high anxiety). Participants then completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC), the Venham Picture Test (VPT) and the Child Fear Survey Schedule-Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS). A global rating scale classified behaviour during dental treatment. RESULTS: State anxiety and dental fear prior to treatment were significantly higher in children allocated to receive inhalation sedation (P = 0.004 and P = 0.005, respectively). There was no significant difference in trait anxiety or post-treatment state anxiety between the two groups (P = 0.69 and P = 0.06, respectively). Only 11% displayed 'negative' behaviour during treatment: 82% of this group represented those allocated to receive sedation. CONCLUSION: Children receiving inhalation sedation were significantly more anxious prior to treatment than children receiving treatment with local analgesia alone. The findings support the subjective assessment of anxiety in children; however, objective anxiety measures may assist clinicians in identifying specific fears, which may ultimately aid patient management. SN - 0960-7439 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/15854112/A_study_to_assess_the_validity_of_clinical_judgement_in_determining_paediatric_dental_anxiety_and_related_outcomes_of_management_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2005.00633.x DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -