Volume 39, Issue 5 pp. 485-490
ARTICLE

Oral health assessment in domiciliary care service planning of older people

Riikka Salmi, DDS

Corresponding Author

Riikka Salmi, DDS

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Stomatognathic Physiology, University of Turku, City of Turku, Finland

Correspondence

Riikka Salmi, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Stomatognathic Physiology, 20014 University of Turku, Finland.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Satu Lahti, DDS, PhD

Satu Lahti, DDS, PhD

Department of Community Dentistry, University of Turku, City of Turku, Finland

Turku Clinical Research Centre, Turku University Hospital, City of Turku, Finland

Search for more papers by this author
Mimmi Tolvanen, MSc, PhD

Mimmi Tolvanen, MSc, PhD

Department of Community Dentistry, University of Turku, City of Turku, Finland

Search for more papers by this author
Riitta Suhonen, RN, PhD

Riitta Suhonen, RN, PhD

Departement of Nursing Science, University of Turku, City of Turku, Finland

Welfare Division, Turku University Hospital, City of Turku, Finland

Search for more papers by this author
Timo Närhi, DDS, PhD

Timo Närhi, DDS, PhD

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Stomatognathic Physiology, University of Turku, City of Turku, Finland

Clinic of Oral Diseases, Turku University Hospital, City of Turku, Finland

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 03 July 2019
Citations: 6

Abstract

Objectives

The aim was to examine importance and consideration of oral health-related issues (OHRIs) during service planning by the case managers (CMs).

Methods and results

The study was conducted in a major Finnish city. All 25 CMs, supervising over 450 domiciliary care employees who are caring for 4600 domiciliary care clients, received a multiple-choice questionnaire with additional open-ended questions. CMs were dichotomized by age and educational background. Differences were compared with the chi-square test and Fisher´s exact test. Response rate was 88%. All CMs considered OHRIs important. However, OHRIs were not routinely considered during service planning, especially by the CMs with a social service than health background (0% vs 30%, P < 0, 0.056). OHRIs were considered never or seldom by 73% of the CMs. OHRIs were mostly considered after evaluating the overall need for domiciliary care. A lack of guidelines was reported by 45% of the CMs. Of the CMs, 41% could use their knowledge for paying attention to OHRIs. All CMs wished for better routines for paying attention to OHRIs.

Conclusion

OHRIs are not routinely considered in service planning. This study indicated a need for structured guidelines and further education for assess the need for oral home care assistance.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

During the writing process, first author has been employed by the same city, but by different organization where the study was conducted. Despite of this fact, all the authors do not have conflicts of interest.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.