ABSTRACT
Objetivo: Analizar las diferencias entre dos modali-dades de administración de un instrumento, autoad-ministrado o guiado por un investigador, aplicados a tutores legales de infantes de una institución educa-tiva. Materiales y Métodos: muestra de 130 tutores legales de niños/as (3 y 5 años) pertenecientes a un jardín de infantes municipal de Avellaneda. Se aplicó un instrumento de recolección de datos sobre hábi-tos de salud bucal constituido por 14 preguntas sim-ples, múltiples y cerradas. La entrega y devolución del instrumento fue a través de la institución. A los 2 meses se convocó a la misma población para comple-tar el mismo instrumento guiado por un investigador. Se evaluó: porcentajede concurrentes e instrumen-tos respondidos totalmente (modalidad autoadminis-trada), porcentaje de concurrentes que completaron el instrumento guiado y concordancia total y por res-puesta de las 2 modalidades. Se analizaron frecuen-cias y porcentajes. Para comparar la concordancia se utilizó Kappa global y Kappa de Cohen para cada pregunta. Resultados: 76,9% de tutores legales res-pondieron en la modalidad autoadministrada y 48,5% la guiada por el investigador. El 80,0% respondió la totalidad de las preguntas del instrumento autoad-ministrado. Al comparar las respuestas para ambas modalidades, no se observaron diferencias signifi-cativas en la totalidad de las mismas. Al analizar las respuestas solo 3 de las 14 preguntas tuvieron una concordancia menor (0,70). Conclusión: Para la po-blación estudiada, la forma autoadministrada tuvo mayor tasa de respuesta que la guiada por un inves-tigador, sin que se registren diferencias en las res-puestas de ambas formas de administración (AU)
Objective: Analyze the differences between two methods of administration of an instrument, self-administered or guided by a researcher, applied to legal guardians of infants in an educational institution. Materials and Methods: Population 130 legal guardians of children (3 and 5 years old) belonging to a municipal kindergarten in Avellaneda. A data collection instrument on oral health habits was applied, consisting of 14 simple, multiple, and closed questions. The delivery and return of the instrument was through the institution. After 2 months, the same population was called to complete the same instrument guided by a researcher. The following were evaluated: percentage of participants and instruments fully answered (self-administered mode), percentage of participants who completed the guided instrument. The total and response agreement of the 2 modalities was evaluated. Frequencies and percentages were analyzed. To compare agreement, global Kappa was used, and Cohen's Kappa was used for each question. Results: 76.9% of legal guardians responded to the self-administered modality and 48.5% to the one guided by the researcher. 80.0% answered all the questions of the self-administered instrument. When comparing the responses for both modalities, no significant differences were observed in all of them. When analyzing the answers, only 3 of the 14 questions had a lower agreement (0.70). Conclusion: For the population studied, the self-administered form had a higher response rate than the one guided by a researcher, with no differences recorded in the responses of both forms of administration (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Infant , Child, Preschool , Dental Health Surveys , Data Collection/methods , Argentina/epidemiology , Oral Hygiene Index , Health Education, Dental , Cross-Sectional Studies , Data Interpretation, StatisticalABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to design and validate an instrument for establishing perceptions of oral health held by physicians treating people living with HIV/AIDS. In order to design the instrument, four domains were identified that could measure the object of study and a 22-item questionnaire was created. The domains established were: knowledge of oral health; personal experience with oral health care; knowledge of oral health regarding HIV/AIDS; professional medical practices. To validate the instrument 50 physicians specializing in infectious diseases from public hospitals of Buenos Aires city completed the questionnaire using a Likert-type scale with 5 categories. The reliability of the instrument was assessed with the test and retest method at 30 days; internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha coefficient; content validity was determined by expert opinion; construct validity with the extreme groups method (Mann Whitney test, p < 0.05). All participants completed the test and retest questionnaires. Their mean age was 37.7 +/- 0.9 years; 36% were female and 64% male. The average experience in medical practice was 8.7 +/- 0.6 years. The instrument proved to be reliable as shown by the value of r(s) = 0.94 in the test-retest method; a satisfactory intra-item consistency was shown by Cronbach's alpha coefficient value of 0.91. The differences between the results of the groups of physicians in the extreme groups were statistically significant (p < 0.001). It is concluded that the instrument designed to measure the perception of oral health of physicians treating people living with HIV/AIDS is valid. However it would be desirable to enlarge the sample and determine criterion validity by comparison with other instruments.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , HIV Seropositivity/psychology , Oral Health , Physicians/psychology , Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/psychology , Adult , Dental Care , Education, Medical , Female , HIV Infections/psychology , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Internet , Male , Pamphlets , Periodicals as Topic , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Referral and Consultation , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Visual Analog ScaleABSTRACT
El objetivo de este trabajo fue construir y validar un instrumento capaz de caracterizar las percepciones de los médicos tratantes de los pacientes que viven con VIH/SIDA respecto de la salud bucal. El diseño del instrumento consistió en la identificación de los cuatro dominios que podrían medir elobjeto en estudio y en la elaboración de un cuestionario de 22 items. Los dominios establecidos fueron: conocimientos sobre la salud bucal; experiencia personal con la atención odontológica; conocimientos sobre la salud bucal respecto del VIH/SIDA; prácticas médicas profesionales. Para la validación del instrumento, participaron 50 médicos especialistas en infectología de hospitales públicos de la CABA, quienes completaron anónima y voluntariamente el cuestionario diseñado empleando una escala de frecuencia tipo Likert de 5 categorías. Se evaluó la confiabilidad mediante la aplicación de test y retest a los 30 días; consistencia interna, mediante el coeficiente α de Cronbach; la validez del contenido, se determinó por opinión de expertos; la validez de construcción fue evaluada mediante el método de grupos extremos (prueba deMann Whitney, p < 0.001). El 100 por ciento de los participantes realizó el test y re-test del cuestionario. La edad promedio fue 37.7 ± 0.9 años; 36 por ciento de género femenino y 64 por ciento masculino, con una media de 8.7 ± 0.6 años de ejercicio profesional. El instrumento resultó confiable ya que en el test-retest se obtuvo una correlación de rs = 0.94. El coeficiente α de Cronbach fue de 0.91, demostrando una satisfactoria coherencia intraitems.Las diferencias correspondientes a los resultados de los grupos de médicos ubicados en los extremos resultaron estadísticamente significativas (p < 0.001). Concluimos que el instrumento elaborado para medir la percepción de los médicos tratantes de los pacientes que viven con VIH/SIDA respecto de la salud bucal resultó válido...
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Adult , Female , Attitude of Health Personnel , Oral Health , HIV Seropositivity/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Internet , HIV Infections/psychology , Physicians/psychology , Periodicals as Topic , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Reproducibility of Results , Referral and Consultation , Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/psychology , Visual Analog ScaleABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to design and validate an instrument for establishing perceptions of oral health held by physicians treating people living with HIV/AIDS. In order to design the instrument, four domains were identified that could measure the object of study and a 22-item questionnaire was created. The domains established were: knowledge of oral health; personal experience with oral health care; knowledge of oral health regarding HIV/AIDS; professional medical practices. To validate the instrument 50 physicians specializing in infectious diseases from public hospitals of Buenos Aires city completed the questionnaire using a Likert-type scale with 5 categories. The reliability of the instrument was assessed with the test and retest method at 30 days; internal consistency with Cronbachs alpha coefficient; content validity was determined by expert opinion; construct validity with the extreme groups method (Mann Whitney test, p < 0.05). All participants completed the test and retest questionnaires. Their mean age was 37.7 +/- 0.9 years; 36
were female and 64
male. The average experience in medical practice was 8.7 +/- 0.6 years. The instrument proved to be reliable as shown by the value of r(s) = 0.94 in the test-retest method; a satisfactory intra-item consistency was shown by Cronbachs alpha coefficient value of 0.91. The differences between the results of the groups of physicians in the extreme groups were statistically significant (p < 0.001). It is concluded that the instrument designed to measure the perception of oral health of physicians treating people living with HIV/AIDS is valid. However it would be desirable to enlarge the sample and determine criterion validity by comparison with other instruments.