Conversion tables for the Corah and Modified Dental Anxiety Scales.

UNLABELLED: Dental anxiety assessment can be achieved by using brief multi-item scales. Corah's Dental Anxiety Scale has been used extensively since the 1970s. However the scale has some flaws which led to the design of the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale incorporating some minor but important improvements. To enable comparison between studies who have adopted one but not both scales a conversion algorithm was required. OBJECTIVE: To produce regression equations and tables to enable researchers to convert derived scores from one scale to another. BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. CLINICAL SETTING: 18 dental practices in Northern Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 1,028) were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corah and Modified Dental Anxiety Scales. RESULTS: Twenty four patients refused (response rate 98%) providing 1,004 patients for analysis. Mean scores for both scales were close to those reported elsewhere. The correlation between the two scales was high (r = 0.89). Regression equation and summary tables presented for conversion purposes. CONCLUSIONS: More accurate estimates of scale scores can be derived with this procedure than simple prorating.

Does completing a dental anxiety questionnaire increase anxiety? A randomised controlled trial with adults in general dental practice.

UNLABELLED: The assessment of dental anxiety can be achieved by using brief multi-item scales. OBJECTIVE: To test the null hypothesis that completing the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale had no immediate influence on patient state anxiety. OUTCOME MEASURE: Speilberger State Anxiety Inventory-6 item Short Form. STUDY DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 1,028) attending 18 dental practices in Northern Ireland were invited to participate. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients refused (response rate 98%) providing 1,004 patients (mean age = 41 years, range = 16 to 90 years; 65% female) for analysis. Patients who completed the dental anxiety scale were found to have a virtually identical state anxiety score: mean (SD) = 11.36 (4.33) compared to those who completed the state anxiety assessment only: mean (SD) = 11.01 (4.35). The mean (CI95%) difference was 0.35 (0.89 to -0.18), t = 1.29, df1002, p = 0.2. CONCLUSION: The completion of a brief dental anxiety questionnaire before seeing the dentist has a non significant effect on state anxiety.

Risk perception of oral cancer in smokers attending primary care: a randomised controlled trial.

To encourage the public to attend and accept oral cancer screening, further understanding is required of the ability of structured information to alter patient knowledge and risk perceptions. Previous work has shown the benefit of written information for those at high risk of oral cancer, especially for tobacco smokers. This study investigated three hypotheses: first that a patient information leaflet (PIL) would enhance risk perceptions, and second that the effect of the leaflet on knowledge would be confirmed as in previous studies and third that these improvements would be associated with smoking behaviour. Patients (N = 995) attending 20 general dental practices in Northern Ireland were invited to participate, 28 refused (response rate = 97%). Patients were randomised into two groups. The experimental group received a PIL and then completed a self-report questionnaire, whereas the control group followed same procedure without the PIL. Measures included a 36 item oral cancer knowledge scale and two items to assess risk perception. Usable data were available from 944 patients; mean (SD) age = 42 (15), 65% female. Risk perceptions of oral cancer were minimally effected by the PIL (p = 0.023). This effect was demonstrable in smokers. Smokers were sixteen (95% CI: 8-30) times more likely to believe that they were at greater risk of oral cancer than non-smokers. A clear benefit of the PIL on patients' oral cancer knowledge was found, particularly for smokers and those with a history of smoking. These findings demonstrate that public awareness of smokers can be raised with written information although health beliefs such as risk perceptions require more intensive intervention.