RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to devise a reliable and valid survey to predict the intensity of someone's gag reflex. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 10-question Predictive Gagging Survey was created, refined, and tested on 59 undergraduate participants. The questions focused on risk factors and experiences that would indicate the presence and strength of someone's gag reflex. Reliability was assessed by administering the survey to a group of 17 participants twice, with 3 weeks separating the two administrations. Finally, the survey was given to 25 dental patients. In these cases, patients completed an informed consent form, filled out the survey, and then had a maxillary impression taken while their gagging response was quantified from 1 to 5 on the Fiske and Dickinson Gagging Intensity Index. RESULTS: There was a moderate positive correlation between the Predictive Gagging Survey and Fiske and Dickinson's Gagging Severity Index, r = +0.64, demonstrating the survey's validity. Furthermore, the test-retest reliability was r = +0.96, demonstrating the survey's reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The Predictive Gagging Survey is a 10-question survey about gag-related experiences and behaviours. We established that it is a reliable and valid method to assess the strength of someone's gag reflex.
RESUMEN
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The degree of reliability and validity of a new electronic pantographic instrument, the Cadiax Compact, has not been established. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the electronic pantograph in calculating condylar settings for 5 different articulators (Denar D5A, Denar Mark II, Whip Mix 8500, Hanau Modular, and Panadent PCH). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Pantograph sensors were mounted to each articulator with custom-made mounting devices. Border movements were made on each articulator with known condylar settings to produce readings at 3-, 5-, and 10-mm condylotrack distances. The condylar settings investigated included horizontal condylar inclination (HCI), immediate mandibular lateral translation (IMLT), progressive mandibular lateral translation (PMLT), top wall, and rear wall. Reliability was assessed by the relative size of standard deviations. Validity was tested with 1-way analysis of variance and the Tukey HSD Test (alpha=.05). RESULTS: The reliability readings for the condylar settings at the 10-mm condylotrack distance, for the most part, were more consistent than those at the 5-mm distance, which, in turn, were more consistent than those at the 3-mm distance. When there were exceptions to this trend, the differences in standard deviations were very small (0.006 mm for IMLT, 0.03 and 0.12 degrees for HCI). When comparing validity between the condylotrack distances, the smallest deviations, in general, were found at the 10-mm distance, the next smallest at the 5-mm distance, and the largest, at the 3-mm distance for HCI. For PMLT, in general, the 10-mm and 5-mm deviations were smaller than the 3-mm deviation. For IMLT, there was no significant difference between the 3-, 5-, and 10-mm deviations. In analyzing validity between the articulators, the smallest deviations from the preset values, in general, were found with the Denar Mark II. CONCLUSION: The standard deviations for assessing reliability and the mean deviations for assessing validity were both relatively small in comparison to the average values of the condylar determinants. Therefore, the electronic pantograph was determined to be both reliable and valid.