Efectividad de la entrevista motivacional en la mejoría de la salud bucal: revisión sistemática

Cascaes, Andreia Morales; Bielemann, Renata Moraes; Clark, Valerie Lyn; Barros, Aluísio J D

doi:10.1590/S0034-8910.2014048004616

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Revisões • Rev. Saúde Pública 48 (1) • Feb 2014 • https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-8910.2014048004616 copiar

Efectividad de la entrevista motivacional en la mejoría de la salud bucal: revisión sistemática

Autoría SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

OBJETIVO

: Analizar la efectividad de la entrevista motivacional en la mejoría de los comportamientos en salud bucal (higiene bucal, consumo de azúcar, uso de servicios odontológicos y uso de flúor) y de los resultados clínicos (placa dentaria, caries y condiciones periodontales).

MÉTODOS

: Revisión sistemática de la literatura con búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed, Web of Science, Lilacs, SciELO, PsyINFO, Cochrane y Google Scholar. Se excluyeron estudios que investigaron la entrevista motivacional como el principal abordaje para mejorar los resultados investigados en salud bucal.

RESULTADOS

: De 78 estudios localizados, diez fueron incluidos, todos aleatorios y controlados; la mayoría (n=8) evaluó múltiples resultados. Cinco intervenciones tuvieron acceso al impacto de la entrevista motivacional en los comportamientos en salud bucal y nueve en resultados clínicos (tres en caries, seis en placa dentaria, cuatro en encía y tres en bolsas periodontales). La mejor cualidad de evidencia fue encontrada en los estudios que investigaron caries, los cuales también poseían las mayores muestras poblacionales. La evidencia del efecto de la entrevista motivacional en la mejoría de la salud bucal fue conflictiva. Cuatro estudios reportaron efectos positivos, mientras que otros cuatro mostraron efecto nulo. La real diferencia entre los grupos no fue presentada o posible de calcular en dos intervenciones.

CONCLUSIONES

: Encontramos resultados inconclusos para la mayoría de los resultados. Son necesarias más intervenciones con metodologías más apropiadas que evalúen ampliamente el impacto de la entrevista motivacional en la salud bucal, así como conocer la dosis adecuada para las intervenciones.

Entrevista Motivacional, utilización; Conductas Saludables; Aceptación de la Atención de Salud; Promoción de la Salud, métodos; Salud Bucal; Revisión

Author, year and country	Sample characteristics	Control group	Intervention group	Number of MI sessions	Duration of MI session (minutes)	Oral health clinical outcomes and measures	Oral health behaviors outcomes and measures	Follow-up (months)	Response rate (%)
Almomani et al¹ (2009) United States	N = 60 Adults between 22 and 62 years old with mental illness from a community program (program not described)	N = 30; TOHE	N = 30; MI + TE	One	15-20	1. Dental plaque^a	–	Two	93.0
Brand et al⁶ (2012) United States	N = 56 Adults with mean age of 61.9, from a university dental school graduate periodontics maintenance program	N = 27; TOHE	N = 29; MI	One	15-20	1. Dental plaque^a 2. Bleeding on probing^b 3. Periodontal probing depth (PPD 4-6 mm and > 7 mm)^b	–	Three	95.0
Freudenthal et al¹³ (2010) United States	N = 72 Parents of children between the ages of 6 to 24 months, enrolled in the Supplemental Nutritional Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC)	N = 32; Nothing	N = 40; MI	Three	20-30	–	1. Reported frequency of child mouth cleaning or tooth-brushing (mean of a Likert scale)	One	94.4
Godard et al¹⁴ (2011) France	N = 51 Adults with mean age of 50 from the Department of Periodontology of a university hospital	N = 27; TOHE	N = 24; MI + TOHE	Two	15-20	1. Dental plaque^c	–	One	100.0
Harisson et al¹⁵ (2007) Canada	N = 240 Mothers of South Asian immigrants children between 6 to18 months of age	N = 122; TOHE	N = 118; MI+ TOHE	Seven	45	1. Dental caries^d	1. Reported number of child fluoride applications received per year (mean)	24	85.4
Harisson et al¹⁶ (2012) Canada	N = 272 Mothers of indigenous children who had recently given birth or were between 12^th and 34^th weeks of pregnancy from Cree indigenous communities	N = 141; TOHE	N = 131; MI	Seven	Not informed	Dental caries^e	Reported child visits to dentist for tooth ache (%)	24	88.6
Ismail, et al¹⁸ (2011) United States	N = 1,021 Caregivers of low-income African-American children aged 0 to 5 from a population-based sample	N = 515; TOHE	N = 506; MI+ TOHE	Two	40	1. Dental caries^f	Reported frequency of tooth-brushing per day and times a week (%) Reported tooth-brushing before bedtime (%)	24	64.0
Lopez-Jornet et al²² (2012) Spain	N = 60 Adults with mean age of 56.7, with hyposalivation and attending the Department of Oral Medicine clinic	N = 30; TOHE	N = 30; MI	Four	Not informed	Dental plaque^g Bleeding on probing^h Periodontal probing depth (PPD 4-5 mm and ≥6 mm)^h	Reported frequency of tooth-brushing per day Reported duration of tooth-brushing in minutes (%) Reported frequency of interdental cleaning (%)	Two	100.0
Jonsson et al¹⁹ (2010) Sweden	N = 113 Adults with mean age of 51.2 referred to a specialized dental clinic for periodontics	N = 56; TOHE + non- surgical periodontal treatment	N = 57; MI + non-surgical periodontal treatment	Seven	Not informed	1. Dental plaqueⁱ 2. Bleeding on probing^b 3. Periodontal probing depth^b	–	12	95.6
Stemann et al⁴⁰ (2013) Sweden	N = 44 Adults with mean age of 50.4, with moderate chronic periodontitis from a dental clinic specialized in periodontology	N = 22; TOHE	N = 22; MI	One	20-90	Dental plaque^b Bleeding on probing^b	–	Six	100.0

Studies	Reporting [0 to 10]	External validity [0 to 3]	Bias^a [0 to 6]	Confounding [0 to 6]	Power [0 to 1]	Overall score [0 to 26]
Brand et al⁶ (2012)	10	0	6	5	1	22
Harisson et al¹⁵ (2007)	10	2	6	4	0	22
Ismail et al¹⁸ (2011)	9	2	5	5	1	22
Godard et al¹⁴ (2011)	10	1	6	4	0	21
Stemman et al⁴⁰ (2012)	8	1	5	6	0	20
Jonsson et al¹⁹ (2010)	9	1	5	4	0	19
Almomani et al¹ (2009)	8	1	4	4	1	18
Lopez-Jornet et al²² (2013)	7	1	5	5	0	18
Harisson et al¹⁶ (2012)	5	0	6	5	1	17
Freudenthal et al¹³ (2010)	5	2	4	3	0	14
Mean (SD) Total (N = 10)	8.1 (1.9)	1.1 (0.7)	5.2 (0.8)	4.5 (0.8)	0.4 (0.5)	19.3 (2.6)

Outcomes	Reference	Summary findings		p-value^a
Outcomes	Reference	Control group	Intervention group	p-value^a
Oral health behaviors
Dental utilization	Harisson et al¹⁶ (2012)	B: 35.5% (N = 39) F: 15.4% (N = 17)	B: 50.0% (N = 65) F: 24.4% (N = 32)	0.085^a
Sugar consumption	–	–	–	–
Oral hygiene	Freudenthal et al¹³ (2010)	B: mean 3.2 (SD NI) F: mean 3.3 (SD NI)	B: mean 2.8 (SD NI) F: mean 3.7 (SD NI)	NI
	Ismail et al¹⁸ (2011)	Brushing 2x per day: B: 47.3% (N = 142) F: NI Brushing 7 days per week: B: 77.3% (N = 232) F: NI Brushing 7 days a week at bedtime: B: 25.3% (N = 76) F: NI	Brushing 2x per day: B: 56.1% (N = 168) F: NI Brushing 7 days per week: B: 76.2% (N = 228) F: NI Brushing 7 days a week at bedtime: B: 34.4% (N = 103) F: NI	0.700^b 0.860^b 0.830^b
	Lopez-Jornet et al²² (2012)	Brushing 2x or more per day: B: 53.3% (N = 16) F: 90.0% (N = 27) Brushing duration ≥ 2 min: B: 30.0% (N = 9) F: 70.0% (N = 21) Interproximal tooth brushing 1x day: B: 36.6% (N = 11) F: 59.9% (N = 18)	Brushing 2x or more per day: B: 86.6% (N = 26) F: 100.0% (N = 30) Brushing duration ≥ 2 min: B: 13.3% (N = 4) F: 80.0% (N = 24) Interproximal tooth brushing 1x day: B: 19.7% (N = 6) F: 56.6% (N = 17)	0.037^a 0.038^a 0.260^a
Fluoride application^c	Harisson et al¹⁵ (2007)	B: mean 0.0 F: mean 0.25 (SD 0.5)	B: mean 0.0 F: mean 3.81 (SD 1.2)	0.001^b
Oral health clinical outcomes
Dental caries	Harisson et al¹⁵ (2007)	dmfs: B: mean almost 0.0 (2 children) F: mean 7.59 (SD 14.2) dmfs plus noncavitated lesions: B: mean almost 0.0 (2 children) F: mean 7.91 (SD 14.2)	dmfs: B: mean dmfs almost 0.0 (4 children) F: mean dmfs 3.35 (SD 7.8) dmfs plus noncavitated lesions: B: mean dmfs almost 0.0 (4 children) F: mean 3.52 (SD 8.0)	0.001^b 0.01^b
	Harisson et al¹⁶ (2012)	Total incidence: B: NI F: 76.4% (N=100)	Total incidence: B: NI F: 65.4% (N = 72)	0.17^b
	Ismail et al¹⁸ (2011)	Cavitated and noncavitated caries: B: mean of 5.59 F: incidence of 6.4	Cavitated and noncavitated caries: B: 5.65 F: incidence of 6.5	0.990^b
Dental plaque	Almomani et al¹ (2009)	B: mean 3.3 (SD 0.8) F: mean 2.5 (SD 0.9)	B: mean 3.6 (SD 0.6) F: mean 1.9 (SD 0.7)	NI
	Brand et al⁶ (2012)	B: mean 2.6 (SD 0.5) F: mean 2.3 (SD 0.7)	B: mean 2.4 (SD 0.6) F: mean 2.1 (SD 2.1)	0.390^b
	Godard et al¹⁴ (2011)	B: mean 58.0% of sites (SD 12) F: mean 54.0% of sites (SD 12)	B: mean 55.0% of sites (SD 15) F: mean 34.0% of sites (SD 20)	0.01^b
Dental plaque	Lopez-Jornet et al²² (2012)	B: mean 0.4 (SD 0.2) F: mean 0.2 (SD 0.1)	B: mean 0.7 (SD 0.1) F: mean 0.3 (SD 0.2)	NI
	Jonsson et al¹⁹ (2010)	B: mean 57.0% of sites (SD 17) F: mean 28.0% of sites (SD 13)	B: mean 59.0% of sites (SD 18) F: mean 14.0% of sites (SD 12)	< 0.001^b
	Stemann et al⁴⁰ (2013)	B: mean 43.1% of sites (SD 19.2) F: mean 18.6% of sites (SD 13.2)	B: mean 50.2% of sites (SD 21.5) F: mean 25.2% of sites (SD 15.4)	> 0.05^b
Bleeding on probing	Brand et al⁶ (2012)	B: mean 55.0% of sites (SD 18) F: mean 36.0% of sites (SD 20)	B: mean 50.0% of sites (SD 18) F: mean 33.0% of sites (SD 15)	0.263^b
	Lopez-Jornet et al²² (2012)	B: mean 22.4% of sites (SD 34.7) F: mean 6.1% of sites (SD 13.4)	B: mean 29.7% of sites (SD 34.9) F: mean 18.4% of sites (SD 25.8)	NI
	Jonsson et al¹⁹ (2010)	B: mean 75.0% of sites (SD 18) F: mean 29.0% of sites (SD 14)	B: mean 70.0% of sites (SD 20) F: mean 19.0% of sites(SD 13)	< 0.001^b
	Stemann et al⁴⁰ (2013)	B: mean 33.0% of sites (SD 12.4) F: mean 18.4% of sites (SD 14.1)	B: mean 36.6% of sites (SD 17.1) F: mean 18.8% of sites (SD 10.9)	> 0.05^b
Periodontal probing depth	Brand et al⁶ (2012)	PPD 4-6 mm: B: mean 23.3% of sites (SD 23.1) F: mean 16.1% of sites (SD 21.4) PPD > 7 mm: B: mean 1.8% of sites (SD 6.9) F: mean 1.4% of sites (SD 5.7)	PPD 4-6 mm: B: mean 23.8% of sites (SD 15.8) F: mean 20.3% of sites (SD 15.0) PPD > 7 mm: B: mean 2.0% of sites (SD 4.1) F: mean 1.7% of sites (SD 3.9)	0.777^b 0.844^b
	Jonsson et al¹⁹ (2010)	PPD 4-5 mm: B: mean 33.0% of sites (SD 14.0) F: mean 12.2% of sites (SD 10.8) PPD ≥ 6 mm: B: mean 9.3% of sites (SD 11.0) F: mean 1.5% of sites (SD 3.2)	PPD 4-5 mm: B: mean 31.0% of sites (SD 14.3) F: mean 10.4% of sites (SD 7.9) PPD ≥ 6 mm: B: mean 9.2% of sites (SD 9.3) F: mean 1.6% of sites (SD 2.9)	> 0.05^b > 0.05^b
	Lopez-Jornet et al²² (2012)	PPD 4-5 mm: B: mean 1.7 (SD 7.5) F: mean 1.5 (SD 7.1) PPD ≥ 6 mm: B: mean 0.0 F: mean 0.0	PPD 4-5 mm: B: mean 3.5 (SD 9.5) F: mean 2.6 (SD 7.1) PPD ≥ 6 mm: B: mean 0.8 (SD 4.5) F: mean 1.0 (SD 5.6)	NI NI

Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo Avenida Dr. Arnaldo, 715, 01246-904 São Paulo SP Brazil, Tel./Fax: +55 11 3061-7985 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revsp@usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Correspondence
: Andreia Morales Cascaes. Faculdade de Odontologia. Departamento de Odontologia Social e Preventiva. Universidade Federal de Pelotas. Rua Gonçalves Chaves, 457 96015-560 Pelotas, RS, Brasil. E-mail: andreiacascaes@hotmail.com