Expanded protocol of orofacial myofunctional evaluation with scores: Validity and reliability

Objective: Clinical evaluation of the stomatognathic system is indispensable for the diagnosis of orofacial myofunctional disorders. In order to obtain a more precise diagnosis, the protocol of orofacial myofunctional evaluation with scores (OMES protocol) (Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol. 72 (2008) 367-375) was expanded in terms of number of items and scale amplitude. The proposal of this study is to describe the expanded OMES protocol (OMES-E) for the evaluation of children. Validity of the protocol, reliability of the examiners and agreement between them were analyzed, as also were the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the instrument. Methods: The sample consisted of videorecorded images of 50 children, 25 boys (mean age = 8.4 years, SD = 1.8) and 25 girls (mean age = 8.2 years, SD = 1.7) selected at random from 200 samples. Three speech therapists prepared for orofacial myofunctional evaluation participated as examiners (E). The OMES and OMES-E protocols were used for evaluation on different days. E1 evaluated all images, E2 analyzed children with recordings from 1 to 25 and E3 analyzed children with recordings from 26 to 50. The validity of OMES-E was analyzed by comparing the instrument to the OMES protocol using the Pearson correlation test complemented with the split-half reliability test (p < 0.05). The linear weighted Kappa coefficient of agreement (Kw`), the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values and the prevalence of OMD were calculated. Results: There was a statistically significant correlation between the OMES and OMES-E protocols (0.79 > r < 0.94, p < 0.01) and a significant test-retest correlation with the OMES-E (0.75 > r < 0.86, p < 0.01), with a reliability range of 0.86-0.93. The correlation and reliability coefficients between examiners were: E1 x E2 (r = 0.74, 0.84), E1 x E3 (r = 0.70, 0.83) (p < 0.01). Kw` coefficients with moderate and good strength predominated. The OMES-E protocol presented mean sensitivity = 0.91, specificity = 0.77, positive predictive value = 0.87 and negative predictive value = 0.85. The mean prevalence of OMD was 0.58. Conclusion: The OMES-E protocol is valid and reliable for orofacial myofunctional evaluation. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Protocol of orofacial myofunctional evaluation with scores

Objective: In the literature there is no validated instrument for the clinical evaluation of the orofacial myofunctional condition of children that will permit the examiner to express numerically his perception of the characteristics and behaviors observed. The proposal of this study is to describe a protocol for the evaluation of children aged 6-12 years in order to establish relations between the orofacial. myofunctional conditions and numerical scales. The protocol validity, reliability of the examiners and agreement between them was analyzed. Methods: Eighty children aged 6-12 years participated in the study. All were evaluated and 30 were selected at random for the analyses (age range: 72-149 months, mean = 103.3, S.D. = 23.57). Individuals with and without orofacial myofunctional. disorders were included. The examiners were two speech therapists property calibrated in orofacial myofunctional evaluation. Two protocols were constructed. One, based on traditional models, was called traditional orofacial. myofunctional. evaluation (TOME), and the other, with the addition of numerical scales, was called orofacial myofunctional. evaluation with scores (OMES). The clinical conditions included were: appearance, posture and mobility of lips, tongue, cheeks and jaws, respiration, mastication and deglutition. Statistical analysis was performed using the split-half reliability method. Means, standard deviations and the Spearman correlation coefficient were also calculated. Results: There was a statistically significant correlation between the evaluations of 30 children assessed with the TOME and OMES protocols (r = 0.85, p < 0.01). The reliability between protocols was 0.92. The test-retest reliability of the OMES instrument was 0.99 and the correlation was 0.98. Reliability between examiners 1 and 2 using the OMES protocol was 0.99, and the correlation was 0.98 (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The OMES protocot proved to be a valid and reliable instrument for orofacial myofunctional evaluation, permitting the grading of orofacial myofunctional conditions within the limits of the selected items. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.