Objectives: As community-oriented public health in oral healthcare for older adults becomes increasingly emphasized, research into community-based oral function rehabilitation interventions is emerging. This study examined the feasibility of community adoption of a previously developed oral function rehabilitation exercise program using an expert-crafted Delphi survey. Methods: An eight-expert panel was formed to develop a Delphi survey instrument and conduct a survey based on the results of previous studies. To test the community applicability of oral function rehabilitation exercises derived from this systematic review, we asked questions related to ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, ‘facility program applicability’, ‘intervention methods’, and ‘outcome indicators’. Results: Except for ‘pharyngeal exercise’ and ‘salivation exercise’, the five main exercises met the validity criteria for ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, and ‘facility program applicability’. The validity of dental hygienists as intervention providers obtained consensus from the experts with a CVR value of 0.75 or higher, an agreement of 0.75-0.85, and a convergence of 0.5. Conclusions The application of oral function rehabilitation exercises in a community setting is feasible, and the dental community should be willing to promote it so that it can be provided to many community-dwelling older adults in the future. In addition, the use of dental hygienists as intervention providers is appropriate. However, their training as intervention providers for oral function rehabilitation exercises may need to be strengthened.

Objectives: As community-oriented public health in oral healthcare for older adults becomes increasingly emphasized, research into community-based oral function rehabilitation interventions is emerging. This study examined the feasibility of community adoption of a previously developed oral function rehabilitation exercise program using an expert-crafted Delphi survey. Methods: An eight-expert panel was formed to develop a Delphi survey instrument and conduct a survey based on the results of previous studies. To test the community applicability of oral function rehabilitation exercises derived from this systematic review, we asked questions related to ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, ‘facility program applicability’, ‘intervention methods’, and ‘outcome indicators’. Results: Except for ‘pharyngeal exercise’ and ‘salivation exercise’, the five main exercises met the validity criteria for ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, and ‘facility program applicability’. The validity of dental hygienists as intervention providers obtained consensus from the experts with a CVR value of 0.75 or higher, an agreement of 0.75-0.85, and a convergence of 0.5. Conclusions The application of oral function rehabilitation exercises in a community setting is feasible, and the dental community should be willing to promote it so that it can be provided to many community-dwelling older adults in the future. In addition, the use of dental hygienists as intervention providers is appropriate. However, their training as intervention providers for oral function rehabilitation exercises may need to be strengthened.

Objectives: As community-oriented public health in oral healthcare for older adults becomes increasingly emphasized, research into community-based oral function rehabilitation interventions is emerging. This study examined the feasibility of community adoption of a previously developed oral function rehabilitation exercise program using an expert-crafted Delphi survey. Methods: An eight-expert panel was formed to develop a Delphi survey instrument and conduct a survey based on the results of previous studies. To test the community applicability of oral function rehabilitation exercises derived from this systematic review, we asked questions related to ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, ‘facility program applicability’, ‘intervention methods’, and ‘outcome indicators’. Results: Except for ‘pharyngeal exercise’ and ‘salivation exercise’, the five main exercises met the validity criteria for ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, and ‘facility program applicability’. The validity of dental hygienists as intervention providers obtained consensus from the experts with a CVR value of 0.75 or higher, an agreement of 0.75-0.85, and a convergence of 0.5. Conclusions The application of oral function rehabilitation exercises in a community setting is feasible, and the dental community should be willing to promote it so that it can be provided to many community-dwelling older adults in the future. In addition, the use of dental hygienists as intervention providers is appropriate. However, their training as intervention providers for oral function rehabilitation exercises may need to be strengthened.

Objectives: As community-oriented public health in oral healthcare for older adults becomes increasingly emphasized, research into community-based oral function rehabilitation interventions is emerging. This study examined the feasibility of community adoption of a previously developed oral function rehabilitation exercise program using an expert-crafted Delphi survey. Methods: An eight-expert panel was formed to develop a Delphi survey instrument and conduct a survey based on the results of previous studies. To test the community applicability of oral function rehabilitation exercises derived from this systematic review, we asked questions related to ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, ‘facility program applicability’, ‘intervention methods’, and ‘outcome indicators’. Results: Except for ‘pharyngeal exercise’ and ‘salivation exercise’, the five main exercises met the validity criteria for ‘independent performance’, ‘education applicability for caregivers’, and ‘facility program applicability’. The validity of dental hygienists as intervention providers obtained consensus from the experts with a CVR value of 0.75 or higher, an agreement of 0.75-0.85, and a convergence of 0.5. Conclusions The application of oral function rehabilitation exercises in a community setting is feasible, and the dental community should be willing to promote it so that it can be provided to many community-dwelling older adults in the future. In addition, the use of dental hygienists as intervention providers is appropriate. However, their training as intervention providers for oral function rehabilitation exercises may need to be strengthened.

PURPOSE: To validate a conceptual short-form health literacy 12 items questionnaire (HL-SF12) in patient populations. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted via a convenient sample of 403 patients from three departments of a community general hospital in the northern Taiwan. Patients' health literacy was assessed with a validated HL-SF12, derived from the full scale, the European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q), as well as a single-item from Chew's Set of Brief Health Literacy Question. A reference population in Northern Taiwan (n = 928) via the HLS-EU-Q in 2013–2014 was used as a reference to compare the health literacy between that of the general public and the patients. Data was analyzed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), internal consistency analysis, correlation analysis, and linear regression models. RESULTS: Patients' health literacy assessed with the HL-SF12 was shown with high internal consistency (Cronbach α = .87), and moderately correlated with the single-item from Chew's Set of Brief Health Literacy Question, with satisfactory item-scale convergent validity (item-scale correlation ≥ .40), without floor/ceiling effect, and with satisfactory goodness of fit indices of the three-factor construct model for most of the patients. Their health literacy was significantly positively associated with female gender, higher income, and more often watching health-related TV programs. On the other hands, patients were reported with significantly higher healthcare health literacy than the general public, but not in general health literacy, disease prevention health literacy, or health promotion health literacy. CONCLUSION: The comprehensive HL-SF12 was a valid and easy to use tool for assessing patients' health literacy in the hospitals to facilitate healthcare providers in enhancing patients' health literacy and healthcare qualities.
Cross-Sectional Studies ; Delivery of Health Care ; Female ; Hand ; Health Literacy* ; Health Personnel ; Health Promotion ; Hospitals, General ; Humans ; Linear Models ; Taiwan