Brewster Lynn, Sherriff Andrea, Macpherson Lorna
Glasgow Dental Hospital & School, 378 Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow G2 3JZ, Scotland.
BMC Public Health. 2013 Aug 27;13:778. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-778.
Childsmile School adopts a directed-population approach to target fluoride varnish applications to 20% of the primary one (P1) population in priority schools selected on the basis of the proportion of enrolled children considered to be at increased-risk of developing dental caries. The study sought to compare the effectiveness of four different methods for identifying individuals most in need when a directed-population approach is taken.
The 2008 Basic National Dental Inspection Programme (BNDIP) cross-sectional P1 Scottish epidemiological survey dataset was used to model four methods and test three definitions of increased-risk. Effectiveness was determined by the positive predictive value (PPV) and explored in relation to 1-sensitivity and 1-specificity.
Complete data was available on 43,470 children (87% of the survey). At the Scotland level, at least half (50%) of the children targeted were at increased-risk irrespective of the method used to target or the definition of increased-risk. There was no one method across all definitions of increased-risk that maximised PPV. Instead, PPV was highest when the targeting method complimented the definition of increased-risk. There was a higher percentage of children at increased-risk who were not targeted (1-sensitivity) when caries experience (rather than deprivation) was used to define increased-risk, irrespective of the method used for targeting. Over all three definitions of increased-risk, there was no one method that minimised (1-sensitivity) although this was lowest when the method and definition of increased-risk were complimentary. The false positive rate (1-specificity) for all methods and all definitions of increased-risk was consistently low (<20%), again being lowest when the method and definition of increased-risk were complimentary.
Developing a method to reach all (or even the vast majority) of individuals at increased-risk defined by either caries experience or deprivation is difficult using a directed-population approach at a group level. There is a need for a wider debate between politicians and public health experts to decide how best to reach those most at need of intervention to improve health and reduce inequalities.
儿童微笑学校采用定向人群方法,将氟化物涂漆应用于根据入学儿童患龋齿风险增加比例选定的优先学校中20%的一年级学生。该研究旨在比较在采用定向人群方法时,四种不同方法识别最需要治疗个体的有效性。
使用2008年英国国家基本牙科检查计划(BNDIP)苏格兰一年级学生横断面流行病学调查数据集,对四种方法进行建模,并测试三种风险增加的定义。有效性由阳性预测值(PPV)确定,并与1 - 敏感性和1 - 特异性相关进行探讨。
共有43470名儿童(占调查的87%)有完整数据。在苏格兰层面,无论用于定向的方法或风险增加的定义如何,至少一半(50%)被定向的儿童处于风险增加状态。在所有风险增加的定义中,没有一种方法能使PPV最大化。相反,当定向方法与风险增加的定义相匹配时,PPV最高。当使用龋齿经历(而非贫困程度)来定义风险增加时,无论采用何种定向方法,未被定向的风险增加儿童比例(1 - 敏感性)更高。在所有三种风险增加的定义中,没有一种方法能使(1 - 敏感性)最小化,尽管当方法与风险增加的定义相匹配时,该值最低。所有方法和所有风险增加定义的假阳性率(1 - 特异性)始终较低(<20%),同样在方法与风险增加的定义相匹配时最低。
使用群体层面的定向人群方法,很难开发出一种能够覆盖所有(甚至绝大多数)因龋齿经历或贫困程度而处于风险增加状态个体的方法。政治家和公共卫生专家之间需要进行更广泛的辩论,以决定如何最好地覆盖那些最需要干预以改善健康和减少不平等的人群。