Premium
Evaluate, assess, treat: development and evaluation of the EAT framework to increase effective communication regarding sensitive oral‐systemic health issues
Author(s) -
DeBate R. D.,
Cragun D.,
Gallentine A. A.,
Severson H. H.,
Shaw T.,
Cantwell C.,
Christiansen S.,
Koerber A.,
Hendricson W.,
Tomar S. L.,
McCormack Brown K.,
Tedesco L. A.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
european journal of dental education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.583
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1600-0579
pISSN - 1396-5883
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0579.2012.00747.x
Subject(s) - motivational interviewing , intervention (counseling) , medicine , referral , oral hygiene , randomized controlled trial , eating disorders , oral health , interview , family medicine , clinical psychology , nursing , dentistry , surgery , political science , law
Oral healthcare providers are likely to encounter a number of sensitive oral/systemic health issues whilst interacting with patients. The purpose of the current study was to develop and evaluate a framework aimed at oral healthcare providers to engage in active secondary prevention of eating disorders (i.e. early detection of oral manifestations of disordered eating behaviours, patient approach and communication, patient‐specific oral treatment, and referral to care) for patients presenting with signs of disordered eating behaviours. The EAT Framework was developed based on the Brief Motivational Interviewing (B‐MI) conceptual framework and comprises three continuous steps: Evaluating, Assessing, and Treating. Using a group‐randomized control design, 11 dental hygiene (DH) and seven dental (D) classes from eight institutions were randomized to either the intervention or control conditions. Both groups completed pre‐ and post‐intervention assessments. Hierarchical linear models were conducted to measure the effects of the intervention whilst controlling for baseline levels. Statistically significant improvements from pre‐ to post‐intervention were observed in the Intervention group compared with the Control group on knowledge of eating disorders and oral findings, skills‐based knowledge, and self‐efficacy (all P < 0.01). Effect sizes ranged from 0.57 to 0.95. No statistically significant differences in outcomes were observed by type of student. Although the EAT Framework was developed as part of a larger study on secondary prevention of eating disorders, the procedures and skills presented can be applied to other sensitive oral/systemic health issues. Because the EAT Framework was developed by translating B‐MI principles and procedures, the framework can be easily adopted as a non‐confrontational method for patient communication.