de Castro Alessandra Maia, de Oliveira Fabiana Sodré, de Paiva Novaes Myrian Stella, Araújo Ferreira Danielly Cunha
Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Odontopediatria, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Spec Care Dentist. 2013 Sep-Oct;33(5):213-7. doi: 10.1111/scd.12022. Epub 2013 Mar 7.
This study compared the parental acceptance of pediatric behavior guidance techniques (BGT). Forty parents of children without disabilities (Group A) and another 40 parents of children with disabilities (Group B) were selected. Each BGT was explained by a single examiner and it was presented together with a photograph album. After that parents evaluated the acceptance in: totally unacceptable, somewhat acceptable, acceptable, and totally acceptable. Results indicated that in Group A, the BGT based on communicative guidance was accepted by most participants. In Group B, just one mother considered totally unacceptable the voice control method and other two, tell-show-do. For both groups, the general anesthesia was the less accepted BGT. There was statistically significant difference in acceptance for protective stabilization with a restrictive device in Group B. Children's parents with and without disabilities accepted behavioral guidance techniques, but basic techniques showed higher rates of acceptance than advanced techniques.
本研究比较了家长对儿科行为指导技术(BGT)的接受程度。选取了40名残疾儿童的家长(B组)和另外40名非残疾儿童的家长(A组)。每项行为指导技术均由一名考官进行解释,并与一本相册一同展示。之后,家长们在以下选项中评估接受程度:完全不可接受、有些可接受、可接受、完全可接受。结果表明,在A组中,大多数参与者接受基于沟通指导的行为指导技术。在B组中,只有一位母亲认为语音控制方法完全不可接受,另外两位母亲认为示范-演示-实践方法完全不可接受。对于两组而言,全身麻醉是最不被接受的行为指导技术。B组中使用限制性装置进行保护性固定的接受程度存在统计学上的显著差异。残疾儿童和非残疾儿童的家长都接受行为指导技术,但基本技术的接受率高于先进技术。