UK population norms for the modified dental anxiety scale with percentile calculator: adult dental health survey 2009 results

Gerry Humphris, John R Crawford, Kirsty Hill, Angela Gilbert, Ruth Freeman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

52 Citations (Scopus)
5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background
A recent UK population survey of oral health included questions to assess dental anxiety to provide mean and prevalence estimates of this important psychological construct.

Methods
A two-stage cluster sample was used for the survey across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The survey took place between October-December 2009, and January-April 2010. All interviewers were trained on survey procedures. Within the 7,233 households sampled there were 13,509 adults who were asked to participate in the survey and 11,382 participated (84%).

Results
The scale was reliable and showed some evidence of unidimensionality. Estimated proportion of participants with high dental anxiety (cut-off score = 19) was 11.6%. Percentiles and confidence intervals were presented and can be estimated for individual patients across various age ranges and gender using an on-line tool.

Conclusions
The largest reported data set on the MDAS from a representative UK sample was presented. The scale’s psychometrics is supportive for the routine assessment of patient dental anxiety to compare against a number of major demographic groups categorised by age and sex. Practitioners within the UK have a resource to estimate the rarity of a particular patient’s level of dental anxiety, with confidence intervals, when using the on-line percentile calculator.
Original languageEnglish
Article number29
JournalBMC Oral Health
Volume13
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 24 Jun 2013

Keywords

  • dental anxiety
  • representative survey
  • psychometrics
  • percentiles
  • on-line calculator

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'UK population norms for the modified dental anxiety scale with percentile calculator: adult dental health survey 2009 results'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this