Background information
Of the 24 older adults, 20 (83%) were assessed to have at least one oral health problem according to ROAG-J and of these, seven (35%) had at least one severe problem (grade 3) (Table 2). The most common oral health problem was for ‘Teeth’ followed by the item ‘Saliva’ (dry mouth). For the item ‘Dentures’, no oral health problems were registered.
Seven of the 24 older adults had poor oral hygiene and/or gingivitis according to ROAG-J (‘Teeth’ and ‘Gums’, Table 2) and were therefore assessed with the OHAI. The causes for having poor oral hygiene (more than one cause was possible per person) were concluded to be poor oral clearance (n=3), frailty (n=3), lack of motivation (n=1), impaired fine motor skills (n=3), pain and fear of pain during oral hygiene activity (n=2) and lack of knowledge about oral hygiene (n=1). In addition, the OHAI assessment showed that the environment in the bathroom for three of the older adults was not adapted to their needs and could therefore in various ways make the oral hygiene more difficult.
Table 2. Outcomes from the ROAG-J assessments according to the nine items in the instrument, including whether there was an established dental health care contact.
Older adult
|
Voice
|
Lips
|
Mucous mem-branes
|
Tongue
|
Gums
|
Teeth
|
Dentures
|
Saliva
|
Swallow-ing
|
Total number of risks3
|
Severe
risk
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
2*
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
5
|
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
5
|
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
51
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
61
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
7
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
|
82*
|
1
|
2
|
-
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
91*
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
10
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
|
11
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
|
121
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
|
13
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
14
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
15
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
0
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
161*
|
2
|
-
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
172*
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
|
182
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
|
19
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
|
20
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
|
21*
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
|
221
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
23
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
|
24*
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
|
Total
Risks4
|
8
|
3
|
3
|
6
|
5
|
10
|
0
|
7
|
4
|
20
|
7
|
1No regular dental health care contact.
2Postponed dental health care appointments.
3Number of oral health problems (ROAG-J grades 2 and 3 = risk).
4Counting each assessment that scored 1 or more. Each score can lead into several suggested actions.
* Poor oral hygiene (but some older adults scored 3 on item “Teeth” due to fractured teeth).
In supplementary material suggested actions from professionals after the ROAG-J and oral hygiene assessments.
Many older adults reported good oral health. However, some experienced severe problems. In these cases, the suspicion of the presence of oral diseases seemed to frighten the older adults, and this affected their daily lives in crucial ways, such as being afraid to chew.
Patient 14 Team D (87 years): It [the bridge in the upper jaw] just came loose. // But the one, on the other side here I feel that it is a little rough underneath. So I am really scared. I barely dare to bite into anything because it [the bridge in the upper jaw] just came loose! // And all teeth have broken within a few months, half a year.
The two main decisions that the teams faced during the oral health assessments were: i) whether the older adults wanted to visit dental care clinics, mainly due to existing oral conditions (Table 2), and/or ii) whether they wanted assistance in various aspects of oral care.
Recognition that a decision needs to be made
The older adults were unaware that they could participate in decisions concerning their oral health; neither relatives nor professionals had realized that persons other than dental professionals could participate in decision-making regarding oral health issues:
Interviewer: You are going to get a lot of work done on your teeth, too, as I understand it?
Patient 15, Team E (87 years): Yes, I am going to get teeth, right? They [dental care personnel] are going to put in teeth where they are missing?
Daughter: We’ll have to see what they [dental care personnel] decide once they have made the decision.
Decision-making was considered as something the older adults or relatives were informed about, not involved in. However, the older adults expressed that they wanted to participate in decision-making and discuss different treatment options.
The home health care nurses seemed to be unsure about how to handle decisions regarding oral diseases. One home health care nurse had contacted a dental clinic regarding an older adult, but since the older adult could not be transported to a dental clinic, she got the impression that dental care organizations did not treat patients with special care needs.
Concerns regarding who was responsible for decisions about oral health were discussed by both the home health care nurses and the dental hygienists. One barrier identified by home health care nurses was that they felt overloaded with responsibilities. As such, oral health became more peripheral:
Nurse, Team C: At times you can feel a little like a naggy nurse, you know. Who kind of says that you would need this, or this would be good for you … but, yeah. *sighs* Then you don’t get that far … Because you’re kind of responsible for so many things and *sighs* This thing with the teeth, well, unfortunately it ends up a bit further down [on the list of priorities].
The home health care nurses and dental hygienists agreed that health planning was important because it determined what steps to take next and helped to understand what needed to be followed up. Nevertheless, several aspects regarding decision-making across organizations were described as complicated by the professionals, for example confidentiality and documentation.
Understanding information related to the decision
The professionals stated that the team-based oral assessments taught them to consider and understand new aspects of care, and tailored information emerged as a result of this.
Nurse, Team D: It was really interesting and a learning experience to be working together with the dental hygienist. She could teach me. And I think that maybe we could teach each other in some way … // … No but with the oral assessment, I could see how she does it in a completely different way than trying to find out myself.
Each organization (i.e. municipal health care and public dental care), with its different rules and regulations, became more visible through the spontaneous dialogues during the collaboration. The oral assessment process became an opportunity to reflect together, understand tailored information and ask questions.
The records in home health care and dental care are not synchronized, and this was seen as jeopardizing the safety of older adults enrolled in home health care. The fragmented system of home health and dental care constituted a major challenge when it came to discussing treatment options, which sometimes could lead to tensions between the different professions. There was also a lack of information about which dental clinic the older adults were registered at, and where to call if oral problems arose.
Nurse 1, Team B: Who are we supposed to contact if it looks abnormal, just a thing like that. As it is today, I know that staff can call [the dental clinic], kind of. But at the same time, we are told elsewhere that the patient, or the staff doesn’t get anything back from [dental care]. What have we assessed, what have we looked at, well … And not me as a nurse either, I never get any feedback, even though I perhaps have assessed according to ROAG that this needs to be done, I won’t get any feedback either.
Some participants suggested that the care processes were in need of further integration that could be supported by a shared digital platform, integrated in existing systems for documentation, to enable better access to information related to medical decisions.
Clarification of values and identification of preferences according to these values
It was important for the teams to be able to describe the role of oral health in ordinary home settings. The dental hygienists described that they had very limited knowledge about the older adults. Sometimes limited understanding could lead dental hygienists to make assumptions regarding older adults’ abilities or inabilities.
Being able to evaluate oral hygiene ability in a structured way in a home setting was considered important when it came to understanding older adults’ total situation. Regarding the personal aspects of oral hygiene, many older adults expressed that they always performed oral care themselves. The oral cavity was considered to be of high integrity.
Patient 16, Team B (90 years): Is some 20-year-old supposed to help me brush my teeth?!?
Interviewer: Yes, how do you feel about that?
Patient: No, I’m not really sure whether they would be so good at it. *laughter*
Many older adults discussed how trust and continuity were important to them when it came to oral health. None of the older adults asked for assistance with ‘hands-on’ oral care. However, they asked for different care options, such as help with cognitive support, for example remembering to brush or get help booking appointments at dental clinics. They also asked for help in getting fluoride in a smaller, lighter bottle.
Consideration of resources, including social influences, that affect the decision
The older adults described how they wanted the care to be provided. For example, before entering their home, many older adults emphasized the importance of proper introductions that included who everyone was, what they planned to do, and why.
Patient 20, Team C (91 years): Yes, then I’ll want them to call first. And inform me about the purpose of the visit. And whether they want anyone else to be there. Or if it’s enough with just me. // To just show up, which some people do just like that. I don’t like that.
The older adults wished for written information before the oral assessments, but some preferred getting the information through a phone call.
All participants stated that it was important to document what was agreed upon. Some older adults wanted relatives to also get the information, others did not. The participants were generally concerned about the most important outcomes of the assessment in regard to what was valuable to them. The older adults often requested that the information would be given in few words and a large font. The professionals wanted the information to be integrated into their digital systems.
The professionals in the teams were used to working mostly on their own. There seemed to be no obvious method or system to make decisions, understand and learn from each other.
Dental hygienist, Team F: The biggest difference was that we so to speak were two professions. Otherwise, as a dental hygienist I think you’re quite independent and work on your own a lot. So that was a big difference today, that we kind of were two who were to take care of this together. And that has a lot of advantages. But we’re not used to it, either.
Conducting oral assessments in teams seemed to support the sharing of the assessments’ results and seemed to influence the decision-making process in such a way that the professionals did not feel alone in making decisions. The team approach was a major change in how home health care nurses experienced collaboration with dental health care.
The nurses considered oral hygiene as a task outside of health care, so issues affecting oral health could be lost in a grey zone between health care and dental care. The understanding of what was most important to each person regarding oral health issues was sometimes regarded as being part of home health care and sometimes not.
Formation of an action plan
It was a new experience to perform oral assessments in collaboration, guiding each other and using instruments which both professional groups could understand and follow.
Nurse 4, Team E: I think that it was an eye-opener to be working together with a dental hygienist as a nurse. We looked at the same things quite a lot. We’re the same. But still, to get to listen to her assessment and see what she was thinking. That was really useful. Even though we made the same assessment on ROAG, many of the other things were still useful to know. That I hadn’t thought of.
A request was made for oral assessments to be coordinated in a simple way so that the action plans could be followed up and revised in an interprofessional and interorganizational process. The creation of an action plan was perceived as a very complex task, involving many aspects of information and coordination, such as oral health status, general status, coordination of care visits, recommended products and follow-ups. When there was no common ground in daily activities, no shared decision-making could take place either. The professionals also stated that different legislations created barriers, where oral health in home health care was placed in a grey zone.
Older adults, home health care nurses and dental hygienists all expressed a desire for innovative options, such as mobile dental health care teams performing dental care in home settings, or digital consultants integrated in a future shared digital tool that enabled the sharing of an action plan, easy to document and schedule. Dental hygienists were requested as team partners for future home health care.
None of the older adults stated that they did not want to participate in decision-making, nor did they not want information about themselves. On the contrary, many expressed a wish to participate, and to receive tailored information.
Patient 5, Team G (81 years): I think that almost the most important thing is that they [the staff] think about me a little. How I am feeling.