Social anxiety disorder: studies of instrument validation for the Brazilian context

Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is a highly prevalent condition even though its recognition and diagnosis are underestimated by both patients and clinicians. In view of the importance of assessment scales for systematic diagnosis in psychiatry, the objective of this investigation was to present studies of validation for the Brazilian population of three instruments for the assessment of different aspects of SAD. The following psychometric studies were carried out: a) discriminative validity of the Mini Social Phobia Inventory (Mini-SPIN-MS), a reduced instrument for the screening of SAD; b) reliability and discriminative validity of the Brief Social Phobia Scale (BSPS), a hetero-applied instrument for the assessment of different aspects of SAD, and c) discriminative validity of the items and subscales of the Self-Statements during Public Speaking Scale (SSPS), an instrument for the assessment of cognitive aspects related to public speaking. All instruments showed excellent psychometric qualities, especially indicators of discrimination between persons with and without SAD, with diagnostic confirmation by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-IV). It was concluded that this set of instruments, with specificity regarding their objectives, could be of great clinical usefulness, especially for the Brazilian population that, until recently, had no such resources for the measurement and assessment of the different aspects of SAD. New multicenter and intercultural studies may provide further information about cultural influences on SAD.

Flat-Oval Root Canal Preparation with Self-Adjusting File Instrument: A Micro-Computed Tomography Study

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the root canal preparation in flat-oval canals treated with either rotary or self-adjusting file (SAF) by using micro-tomography analysis. Methods: Forty mandibular incisors were scanned before and after root canal instrumentation with rotary instruments (n = 20) or SAF (n = 20). Changes in canal volume, surface area, and cross-sectional geometry were compared with preoperative values. Data were compared by independent sample t test and chi(2) test between groups and paired sample t test within the group (alpha = 0.05). Results: Overall, area, perimeter, roundness, and major and minor diameters revealed no statistical difference between groups (P > .05). In the coronal third, percentage of prepared root canal walls and mean increases of volume and area were significantly higher with SAF (92.0%, 1.44 +/- 0.49 mm(3), 0.40 +/- 0.14 mm(2), respectively) than rotary instrumentation (62.0%, 0.81 +/- 0.45 mm(3), 0.23 +/- 0.15 mm2, respectively) (P < .05). SAF removed dentin layer from all around the canal, whereas rotary instrumentation showed substantial untouched areas. Conclusions: In the coronal third, mean increases of area and volume of the canal as well as the percentage of prepared walls were significantly higher with SAF than with rotary instrumentation. By using SAF instruments, flat-oval canals were homogenously and circumferentially prepared. The size of the SAF preparation in the apical third of the canal was equivalent to those prepared with #40 rotary file with a 0.02 taper. (J Endod 2011;37:1002-1007)