Design and quality control of the oral health status examination in the German National Cohort (GNC)

  • Birte Holtfreter
  • Stefanie Samietz
  • Katrin Hertrampf
  • Ghazal Aarabi
  • Daniel Hagenfeld
  • Ti-Sun Kim
  • Thomas Kocher
  • Bernd Koos
  • Marc Schmitter
  • Wolfgang Ahrens
  • Elizabeth Alwers
  • Heiko Becher
  • Klaus Berger
  • Hermann Brenner
  • Antje Damms-Machado
  • Nina Ebert
  • Beate Fischer
  • Claus-Werner Franzke
  • Stefanie Frölich
  • Halina Greiser
  • Anton Gies
  • Kathrin Günther
  • Lamiaa Hassan
  • W Hoffmann
  • Lina Jaeschke
  • Thomas Keil
  • Yvonne Kemmling
  • Gérard Krause
  • Lilian Krist
  • Nicole Legath
  • Wolfgang Lieb
  • Michael Leitzmann
  • Jakob Linseisen
  • Markus Loeffler
  • Claudia Meinke-Franze
  • Karin B Michels
  • Rafael Mikolajczyk
  • Nadia Obi
  • Annette Peters
  • Tobias Pischon
  • Sabine Schipf
  • Börge Schmidt
  • Henry Völzke
  • Sabina Waniek
  • Claudia Wigmann
  • Kerstin Wirkner
  • Carsten Oliver Schmidt
  • Jan Kühnisch
  • Stefan Rupf

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Caries and periodontitis are highly prevalent worldwide. Because detailed data on these oral diseases were collected within the framework of the German National Cohort (GNC), associations between oral and systemic diseases and conditions can be investigated.

OBJECTIVES: The study protocol for the oral examination was designed to ensure a comprehensive collection of dental findings by trained non-dental staff within a limited examination time. At the mid-term of the GNC baseline examination, a first quality evaluation was performed to check the plausibility of results and to propose measures to improve the data quality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A dental interview, saliva sampling and oral diagnostics were conducted. As part of the level‑1 examination, the number of teeth and prostheses were recorded. As part of the level‑2 examination, detailed periodontal, cariological and functional aspects were examined. All examinations were conducted by trained non-dental personnel. Parameters were checked for plausibility and variable distributions were descriptively analysed.

RESULTS: Analyses included data of 57,967 interview participants, 56,913 level‑1 participants and 6295 level‑2 participants. Percentages of missing values for individual clinical parameters assessed in level 1 and level 2 ranged between 0.02 and 3.9%. Results showed a plausible distribution of the data; rarely, implausible values were observed, e.g. for measurements of horizontal and vertical overbite (overjet and overbite). Intra-class correlation coefficients indicated differences in individual parameters between regional clusters, study centres and across different examiners.

CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm the feasibility of the study protocol by non-dental personnel and its successful integration into the GNC's overall assessment program. However, rigorous dental support of the study centres is required for quality management.

Bibliographical data

Original languageGerman
ISSN1436-9990
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 04.2020
PubMed 32166336