Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust and London South Bank University at Department of Children's Nursing, Faculty of Health & Social Care, London South Bank University London, England.
Cancer Nurs. 2010 Jul-Aug;33(4):E1-E19. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181cb40c0.
Observing and recording the signs and symptoms of oral mucositis are an important part of oral care, essential to the prevention and treatment of mucositis. Structured oral assessment enables a more informed and accurate identification of signs and symptoms and will enable early and individualized interventions.
A United Kingdom-based mouth-care group conducted a systematic review of the published literature through to March 2004 and repeated in 2008. The goal of this review was to identify and evaluate the range of instruments used to assess oral mucositis to recommend in evidence-based guidelines the "best" instrument to use in the field of children's and young people's cancer care.
Search sources included the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Studies were selected using defined criteria and reviewed by 3 pairs of group members.
Fifty-four individual oral assessment instruments were identified with only 15 reporting evidence of reliability and validity testing. Only 3 articles reported on oral assessment exclusively in our population.
The guidelines recommend only 1 assessment instrument, the Oral Assessment Guide, or adaptations of this instrument, to be used in clinical practice. Five factors influenced this recommendation: purpose of assessment, population, outcomes assessed, and quality of the instrument and ease of use.
The Oral Assessment Guide has been consistently judged to be user-friendly and appropriate for everyday clinical practice with both adults and children, as well as a useful research tool.
观察和记录口腔黏膜炎的体征和症状是口腔护理的重要组成部分，对预防和治疗黏膜炎至关重要。结构化口腔评估能够更准确地识别体征和症状，并能尽早进行个体化干预。
一个总部设在英国的口腔护理小组对截至 2004 年 3 月和 2008 年发表的文献进行了系统评价。本次评价的目的是确定和评估用于评估口腔黏膜炎的各种工具，并为儿童和青少年癌症护理领域的循证指南推荐“最佳”工具。
搜索来源包括 Cochrane 图书馆、MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 CINAHL。研究采用明确的标准进行选择，并由 3 对小组成员进行审查。
共确定了 54 种口腔评估工具，只有 15 种报告了可靠性和有效性测试的证据。仅有 3 篇文章专门报告了我们人群中的口腔评估情况。
指南仅推荐 1 种评估工具，即口腔评估指南或其改编版，用于临床实践。有 5 个因素影响了这一建议：评估目的、人群、评估结果以及工具的质量和易用性。
口腔评估指南一直被认为是一种用户友好且适用于成人和儿童日常临床实践的工具，也是一种有用的研究工具。
