北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2022, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (1): 100-104. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2022.01.016

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

应用Delphi法构建下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度评分量表

陈震,谷宝鑫,汤玉芳,闫子玉,倪方端,崔念晖()   

  1. 北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院口腔颌面外科,国家口腔医学中心,国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心,口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室,口腔数字医学北京市重点实验室,国家卫生健康委员会口腔医学计算机应用工程技术研究中心,国家药品监督管理局口腔生物材料重点实验室,北京 100081
  • 收稿日期:2021-10-11 出版日期:2022-02-18 发布日期:2022-02-21
  • 通讯作者: 崔念晖 E-mail:kqcuinianhui@bjmu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    北京大学口腔医院新技术新疗法项目(PKUSSNCT-20B09)

Constructions of the scale of difficulty in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars by using Delphi method

CHEN Zhen,GU Bao-xin,TANG Yu-fang,YAN Zi-yu,NI Fang-duan,CUI Nian-hui()   

  1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Research Center of Engineering and Technology for Computerized Dentistry & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Beijing 100081, China
  • Received:2021-10-11 Online:2022-02-18 Published:2022-02-21
  • Contact: Nian-hui CUI E-mail:kqcuinianhui@bjmu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    Program for New Clinical Techniques and Therapies of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology(PKUSSNCT-20B09)

RICH HTML

  

摘要:

目的: 评估影响下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度的相关指标,对不同操作和风险指标进行难度评分,构建出直观且准确的下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度评分量表,以期帮助医生在术前对手术难度进行更加准确的分析与预测。方法: 以文献和临床回顾为基础,汇总拔牙难度指标。首先由10位来自北京大学口腔医院长期从事牙槽外科专业工作的医师组建专家名义小组,以面对面发放问卷的形式,请专家对汇总的拔牙难度指标是否需要保留进行打分,经商议后形成评估下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度一、二级条目框架;再采用Delphi专家咨询法通过电子邮件的方式向30名Delphi专家发送问卷,经过两轮打分及修改,形成下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度评分量表。结果: 两轮问卷回收率均为100.0%,即专家的积极系数(Cj)均为100%;两轮Delphi专家咨询的权威系数(Cr)为0.92,说明结果具有一定代表性和权威性;经过两轮打分及修改,专家打分变异系数(CV)变小,意见协调系数(W)升高,均有统计学显著意义[第一轮CV为0.24,W为0.56(P<0.001);第二轮CV为0.19,W为0.72(P<0.001)],说明专家意见有较好的趋同性。最终形成含有12个一级指标和37个二级指标的下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度评分量表,包含操作难度指标项、风险难度指标项和共同难度指标项。结论: 在进行全面文献检索的基础上,提出下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度由操作难度和风险难度共同构成的观点,采用Delphi专家咨询法,将专家长期的临床经验、专业知识转化成量化指标,作为拔牙难度预测的评分量表,具有一定的代表性和权威性。

关键词: 下颌阻生第三磨牙, 牙拔除术, 难度评估, Delphi专家咨询法

Abstract:

Objective: To evaluate the relevant indicators affecting difficulty in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars and score difficulty of different operation and risk indicators, so as to build an intuitive and accurate scale to help operators make more accurate analysis and prediction of difficulty before the operation. Methods: Based on literature and the clinical review, the difficulty indicators of tooth extraction were summarized. Firstly, 10 doctors from Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology who had been engaged in alveolar surgery for a long time established an expert nominal group, and then rated whether the summarized indicators needed to be retained in the form of face-to-face questionnaires. A level 1 and 2 item frame for evaluating difficulty in the tooth extraction was formed after discussion; Then Delphi method was used to send a questionnaire to 30 experts by e-mail. After two rounds of scoring and modification, the scale of difficulty in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars was formed. Results: The recycling rate of two rounds of questionnaires was 100.0%,which showed that the experts were very enthusiastic about the study; The authority coefficients (Cr) of the two rounds of Delphi expert consultation were both 0.92, which showed that the results were representative and authoritative. After two rounds of grading and revision, the variable coefficient (CV) decreased and the Kendall’s concordance coefficient (W) increased, which were statistically significant: In the first round, the CV was 0.24 and W was 0.56 (P<0.001), and in the second, the CV was 0.19 and W was 0.72 (P<0.001), which indicated that there was a good convergence among the expert opinions. Finally, a scale of difficulty in the tooth extraction containing 12 items at level A and 37 items at level B was formed, including operation difficulty indicators, risk difficulty indicators and common difficulty indicators. Conclusion: Based on comprehensive literature retrieval, the study has put forward the concept that difficulty in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars is composed of operation difficulty and risk difficulty. Using Delphi method, the long-term clinical experience and professional knowledge of experts are transformed into quantitative indicators as a scoring scale. The scale has certain representativeness and authority.

Key words: Impacted mandibular third molars, Tooth extraction, The scale of difficulty, Delphi method

中图分类号: 

  • R782

表1

专家名义小组基本情况"

Basic information Items Number
Gender Male 6
Female 4
Age/years 31-40 1
41-49 3
≥50 6
Years of clinical work 10-15 1
15-20 3
≥20 6
Final degree Bachelor 1
Master 0
Doctor 9
Professional title Attending physician 1
Associate
chief physician
4
Chief physician 5

表2

Delphi专家咨询组基本情况"

Basic information Items Number
Age/years 31-40 9
41-50 11
>50 10
Years of clinical work 5-10 5
11-15 5
16-20 6
>20 14
Final degree Bachelor 4
Master 5
Doctor 21
Professional title Attending physician 8
Associate
chief physician
13
Chief physician 9
Research direction Alveolar surgery 22
Oral and maxillofacial surgery 5
Others 3
[1] Sanchez-Torres A, Soler-Capdevila J, Ustrell-Barral M, et al. Patient, radiological, and operative factors associated with surgical difficulty in the extraction of third molars: A systematic review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2020, 49(5):655-665.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2019.10.009
[2] Montserrat-Bosch M, Figueiredo R, Nogueira-Magalhaes P, et al. Efficacy and complications associated with a modified inferior alveolar nerve block technique. A randomized, triple-blind clinical trial[J]. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal, 2014, 19(4):E391-E397.
[3] Sigron G, Pourmand P, Mache B, et al. The most common complications after wisdom-tooth removal: Part 1: A retrospective study of 1 199 cases in the mandible[J]. Swiss Dent J, 2014, 124(10):1042-1046, 1052.
pmid: 25342545
[4] 赵珺如, 刘乙澍, 崔念晖. 下颌第三磨牙拔除术后并发双侧广泛性皮下气肿及纵隔气肿1例报告[J]. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2021, 14(2):253-256.
[5] Diniz-Freitas M, Lago-Mendez L, Gude-Sampedro F, et al. Pederson scale fails to predict how difficult it will be to extract lower third molars[J]. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2007, 45(1):23-26.
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2005.12.004
[6] Al-Samman AA. Evaluation of Kharma scale as a predictor of lower third molar extraction difficulty[J]. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal, 2017, 22(6):e796-e799.
[7] Zhang X, Wang L, Gao Z, et al. Development of a new index to assess the difficulty level of surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars in an Asian population[J/OL]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2019, 77(7): 1358.e1-1351.e8 [2021-10-01]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30959010/ .
[8] 王芷乔. 应用德尔菲法确立甲状腺癌中医证候及分型指标的调查研究[D]. 北京中医药大学, 2016.
[9] Humphrey-Murto S, Varpio L, Gonsalves C, et al. Using consensus group methods such as Delphi and Nominal Group in medical education research[J]. Med Teach, 2017, 39(1):14-19.
doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1245856 pmid: 27841062
[10] 史静琤, 莫显昆, 孙振球. 量表编制中内容效度指数的应用[J]. 中南大学学报(医学版), 2012, 37(2):49-52.
[11] Lakhani A, Watling DP, Zeeman H, et al. Nominal group technique for individuals with cognitive disability: A systematic review[J]. Disabil Rehabil, 2018, 40(18):2105-2115.
doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1325946 pmid: 28503963
[12] 王青, 朱晓丹, 常茹, 等. 基于德尔菲专家咨询法构建稳定期精神分裂症康复方案的研究[J]. 现代医药卫生, 2021, 37(14):2357-2361.
[13] Sutherland K, Yeung W, Mak Y, et al. Envisioning the future of clinical analytics: A modified Delphi process in New South Wales, Australia[J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2020, 20(1):210.
doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01226-7
[14] Langmack KA, Newton LA, Jordan S, et al. Cone beam CT dose reduction in prostate radiotherapy using Likert scale methods [J/OL]. Br J Radiol, 2016, 89: 20150460 [2021-10-01]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26689092/ .
[15] Wu C, Wu P, Li P, et al. Construction of an index system of core competence assessment for infectious disease specialist nurse in China: A Delphi study[J]. BMC Infect Dis, 2021, 21(1):791.
doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-06402-2
[16] Niederberger M, Spranger J. Delphi technique in health sciences: A map[J]. Front Public Health, 2020, 8:457.
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00457 pmid: 33072683
[17] Nasa P, Jain R, Juneja D. Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness[J]. World J Methodol, 2021, 11(4):116-129.
[18] Jiang F, Liu T, Zhou H, et al. Developing medical record-based, healthcare quality indicators for psychiatric hospitals in China: A modified Delphi-analytic hierarchy process study[J]. Int J Qual Health Care, 2019, 31(10):733-740.
doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzz005 pmid: 30753601
[19] Carvalho RF, Vasconcelos BC. Pernambuco index: Predictability of the complexity of surgery for impacted lower third molars[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2018, 47(2):234.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.07.013
[20] 史嘉昕. 下颌第三磨牙拔除时间的多因素相关分析及预测模型建立[D]. 天津医科大学, 2020.
[1] 李红光,韩玮华,吴训,冯继玲,李刚,孟娟红. 关节腔冲洗联合液态浓缩生长因子注射治疗单侧颞下颌关节骨关节炎的初步研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(2): 338-344.
[2] 周颖,赵宁,黄竑远,李庆祥,郭传瑸,郭玉兴. 左侧三叉神经第三支带状疱疹并发左侧下颌骨骨坏死1例[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(2): 366-370.
[3] 周颖,赵宁,黄竑远,李庆祥,郭传瑸,郭玉兴. 双层软组织缝合封闭技术在下颌骨中早期药物相关性颌骨骨坏死患者手术治疗中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 51-56.
[4] 徐心雨,吴灵,宋凤岐,李自力,张益,刘筱菁. 基于下颌运动轨迹的正颌外科术中下颌骨髁突定位方法及初步精度验证[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 57-65.
[5] 王聪伟,高敏,于尧,章文博,彭歆. 游离腓骨瓣修复下颌骨缺损术后义齿修复的临床分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 66-73.
[6] 蔡安东,王晓霞,周文娟,柳忠豪. 下颌前突畸形患者上颌骨及髁突虚拟位置与术后现实位置的比较[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 74-80.
[7] 李穗,马雯洁,王时敏,丁茜,孙瑶,张磊. 上前牙种植单冠修复体切导的数字化设计正确度[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 81-87.
[8] 刘晓强,周寅. 牙种植同期植骨术围术期高血压的相关危险因素[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 93-98.
[9] 段登辉,WANGHom-Lay,王恩博. 可吸收胶原膜在颊侧袋形瓣引导性骨再生手术中的作用: 一项回顾性影像学队列研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(6): 1097-1104.
[10] 黄莹,吴志远,周行红,蔡志刚,张杰. 股前外侧皮瓣修复上颌骨缺损术后面部软组织对称性感观分级[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(4): 708-715.
[11] 张雯,刘筱菁,李自力,张益. 基于解剖标志的鼻翼基底缩窄缝合术对正颌患者术后鼻唇部形态的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(4): 736-742.
[12] 王哲,孙伟,杨雪,宋颖,姬爱平,白洁. 口腔急诊颌面部感染患者临床分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(3): 543-547.
[13] 高梓翔,王勇,温奥楠,朱玉佳,秦庆钊,张昀,王晶,赵一姣. 基于三维下颌骨平均模型的颌骨标志点自动确定方法[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(1): 174-180.
[14] 郭玉兴,张建运,王佃灿,郭传瑸. 药物相关颌骨骨坏死的病理特点及临床治疗策略[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2022, 54(6): 1190-1195.
[15] 俞光岩,苏家增,柳登高,吴立玲,丛馨. 下颌下腺保存治疗新技术体系的建立与应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2022, 54(5): 842-845.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . 书讯[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 225 -328 .
[2] 黄萍, 刘炯, 夏英杰, 仲燕莹, 陈跃国. 两种准分子激光手术治疗超高度近视的对比研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(5): 498 -502 .
[3] 范少光. 向王志均院士学习[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2000, 32(4): 300 .
[4] 马红, 高妍, 杨建梅, 惠岩, 陈澜, 王淑凤. 人血浆瘦素水平与肥胖及血浆胰岛素水平的关系[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2001, 33(6): 559 -561 .
[5] 樊志荣, 卢义侠, 李长龄. 肾病综合征大鼠肾小球血管紧张素Ⅱ受体结合的变化及机制[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2001, 33(6): 565 .
[6] 范蓉, 张成飞, 高岩, 李斌斌, 王晶. 核因子-κB受体活化因子配体和骨保护素在慢性根尖周炎病损组织中的表达[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2008, 40(1): 39 -42 .
[7] 章巍, 王广发, 张红, 牟向东, 金哲. 用内科胸腔镜进行滑石粉胸膜固定术治疗恶性胸腔积液27例临床分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2008, 40(6): 600 -602 .
[8] 田清平, 冯雪茹, 庞永正, 唐朝枢, 刘梅林. 血浆皮质醇激素抑制素水平与冠心病的关系[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(5): 537 -540 .
[9] 陈磊, 张豪, 冯海兰, 张凤军. 正常受试者单侧咀嚼运动中的牙合接触模式[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(1): 90 -94 .
[10] 赵英芳, 田新霞, 杜娟, 张云岗, 刘松年, 林杰, 郑杰. 胃癌中p16INK4a和RB基因甲基化状况及其表达[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2003, 35(4): 382 -385 .