Article Data

  • Views 609
  • Dowloads 155

Original Research

Open Access

Parental Cooperation Scale in the Pediatric Dentistry Setting: Reliability and Criteria

  • Kupietzky A1,*,
  • Tal E2
  • Vargas KG3

1Department of Pediatric Dentistry Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Dental Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel. Visiting Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, UMDNJ-New Jersey Dental School, Newark, NJ

2Private practice, Jerusalem, Israel

3Private practice, North Liberty, Iowa

DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.37.2.j1r7n414v1614135 Vol.37,Issue 2,March 2013 pp.157-162

Published: 01 March 2013

*Corresponding Author(s): Kupietzky A E-mail: drkup@netvision.net.il

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to provide reliability and criteria data on a newly defined parental cooperation scale (PCS) and in addition correlate between parent scores and their child's behavior in the dental setting. Study design: 244 parents accompanying their child to a dental visit were evaluated by two independent pediatric dentist evaluators. 150 parents were designated to be revaluated at least two weeks following the initial evaluation by the same examiner. Children's dental behavior was previously evaluated using the Frankl rating scale. Results: A majority of the parents were found to be highly positive and positive (40% of the parents were evaluated as being PCS rating 4, 26% were rated 3). 35% of the parents were rated as being negative or extremely negative (27%, 8% respectively). 139 parents were re-evaluated at least two weeks following their initial assessment. 64% were rated as highly cooperative and cooperative; 36% were negative or extremely negative. 244 children participated in the study (mean age ± SD, 6.8 years ± 2.86). 67% were rated as Frankl scale extremely cooperative and cooperative (31%, 35.5% respectively). 33% were negative or extremely negative (26.1%, 7.3% respectively). When comparing the Frankl behavior of each child to their parent's PCS a significant association was found (McNemar test value 17.668, p=0.007). Conclusion: The PCS was evaluated and found to be a reliable tool to evaluate parental dental behavior. Parents with negative behavior were more likely to present with children who also exhibit negative dental behavior and vice versa.

Keywords

Dental behavior, parenting, pediatric dental practice

Cite and Share

Kupietzky A,Tal E,Vargas KG. Parental Cooperation Scale in the Pediatric Dentistry Setting: Reliability and Criteria. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2013. 37(2);157-162.

References

1. Soxman J: Parenting the parents of pediatric patients. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 27: 630-4, 2006

2. Grembowski D, Milgrom P, Fiset L. Factor’s influencing dental deci-sion-making. J Public Health Dent 48:159-167, 1988

3. Sheller B.: Challenges of managing child behavior in the 21st century dental setting. Pediatr Dent 26:111-113, 2004

4. Casamassimo PS, Wilson S, Gross L. Effects of changing US parenting styles on dental practice: Perceptions of diplomates of the American Board of Pediatric Dentistry. Pediatr Dent 24:18-22, 2002.

5. Krikken JB, Veerkamp JS. Child rearing styles, dental anxiety and disrup-tive behaviour; an exploratory study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent Suppl 1:23-8, 2008

6. Aminabadi NA, Farahani RM. Correlation of parenting style and pediatric behavior guidance strategies in the dental setting: preliminary findings. Acta Odontol Scand 66:99-104, 2008

7. Venham LL, Murray, P, Gaulin-Kremer, E. Child-rearing variables affecting the preschool child’s response to dental stress. J Dent Res 58:2042-2045, 1979

8. Allen KD, Hutfless S, Larzelere R. Evaluation of two predictors of child disruptive behavior during restorative dental treatment. J Dent Child 70:221-5, 2003

9. Themessl-Huber M, Freeman R, Humphris G, MacGillivray S, Terzi N. Empirical evidence of the relationship between parental and child dental fear: a structured review and meta-analysis. Int J Paediatr Dent 20:83-101, 2010

10. Kyritsi MA, Dimou G, Lygidakis NA. Parental attitudes and perceptions affecting children’s dental behaviour in Greek population. A clinical study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 10:29-32, 2009

11. Frankl S, Shiere FR, Fogels HR. Should the parent remain with the child in the dental operatory? J Dent Child 29:150-163, 1962

12. Cheng TL, Savageau JA, DeWitt TG, Bigelow C, Charney E. Expectations, goals, and perceived effectiveness of child health supervision: a study of mothers in a pediatric practice. Clin Pediatr 35:129–37, 1996

13. Hart CN, Drotar D, Gori A, Lewin L. Patient Educ Couns. Enhancing parent-provider communication in ambulatory pediatric practice 63:

38- 46., 2006

14. Noblie, C. Drotar D. Research on the Quality of Parent-Provider Communi-cation in Pediatric Care: Implications and Recommendations. J Dev Behav Pediatr 24:279–290, 2003

15. Long N. The changing nature of parenting in America. Pediatr Dent 26:121-124, 2004

16. Colares V, Richman L. Factors associated with uncooperative behavior by Brazilian preschool children in the dental office. J Dent Child 69,

87- 91,2002

17. Shinohara S, et al. Structural relationship of child behavior and its evalua-tion during dental treatment. J. Oral Sci. 47: 91-96, 2005

18. Capps L, Sigman M, Sena R, Henker B, Whalen C. Fear, anxiety, and perceived control in children of agoraphobic parents. J Child Psycho Psychiatry 37:445- 52, 1996.

19. Rapee RM. Potential role of childrearing practices in the development of anxiety and depression. Clin Psychol Rev 17: 47-67, 1997.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

PubMed (MEDLINE) PubMed comprises more than 35 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top