Appendix A Survey on CDC s Guidelines for Infection Control in Dental HealthCare Settings 2003

Transcription

1 SUPPLEMENTAL DATA Appendix A Survey on CDC s Guidelines for Infection Control in Dental HealthCare Settings 2003 Cleveland JL et al. JADA 2012;143(10): Supplemental Data 1

2 Cleveland JL et al. JADA 2012;143(10): Supplemental Data 2

3 Cleveland JL et al. JADA 2012;143(10): Supplemental Data 3

4 Appendix B Sample weighting procedures used The initial sampling frame consisted of 115,440 dentists spread across 10 strata (specialty groups). We drew a stratified random sample of 6,825 dentists (random within each stratum). We then calculated the original base weight (weight 1) by dividing the initial frame counts per stratum by the initial sample size within each stratum. Because we were missing information regarding specialty for three of the 6,825 dentists, we made a ratio adjustment to the original base weight. Table B1 shows these results. If everyone in the original sample of 6,825 had been eligible and responded, they would have a Weight 1 adjustment, which would include the three practices with missing specialty information. Also, the sum of Weight 1 adjusted would have equaled 115,440. However, the sample included ineligible dentists. Table B1 Number of dentists in sampling frame, survey sample, Weight 1 and Weight 1 adjusted for missing specialty. SPECIALTY SAMPLING SURVEY SAMPLE WEIGHT 1 ( / SAMPLE) WEIGHT 1 ADJUSTED* General Practice 92,502 4, Oral Surgery 4, Endodontics 2, Orthodontics 7, Pediatric 2, Periodontics 3, Prosthodontics 1, Oral Pathology Public Health Oral Radiology Missing 3 0 Not applicable Not applicable TOTAL 115,440 6, , ,440 * Distributes the three missing specialty groups proportionally into the other 10 strata. Sum of (Weight 1) (no. in survey sample) across specialty. Sum of (Weight 1 adjusted) (no. in survey sample) across specialty. Cleveland JL et al. JADA 2012;143(10): Supplemental Data 4

5 Next, we had to determine the eligibility rate within each stratum. We considered dentists ineligible if their disposition code was any of the following: not in private practice, unclaimed mailing, deceased or suspended membership in the American Dental Association. We calculated the ineligibility rate per stratum as number in the sample divided by the number in the sample who were ineligible. Table B2 shows these results. Table B2 Number of dentists in sampling frame, survey sample, number ineligible and ineligibility rate, according to specialty. SPECIALTY SAMPLING SURVEY SAMPLE NO. INELIGIBLE IN SAMPLE INELIGIBILITY RATE (PERCENTAGE)* General Practice 92,502 4, Oral Surgery 4, Endodontics 2, Orthodontics 7, Pediatric 2, Periodontics 3, Prosthodontics 1, Oral Pathology Public Health Oral Radiology Missing 3 0 Not applicable Not applicable TOTAL 115,440 6, * Number ineligible in sample divided by number in sample. Cleveland JL et al. JADA 2012;143(10): Supplemental Data 5

6 Then we calculated the eligibility rate per stratum as 1 minus the ineligibility rate. Next, we multiplied the eligibility rate by the original frame counts by stratum to arrive at revised eligible frame counts. The revised eligible frame count totals 105,655 dentists, and the revised eligible sample size is 6,248 dentists. Table B3 presents these results. Table B3 Number of dentists in sampling frame, eligibility rate, revised eligible number in frame and number of respondents, according to specialty. SPECIALTY ELIGIBILITY RATE (1 INELIGIBILITY REVISED ELIGIBLE NO. NO. OF RESPONDENTS RATE) (PERCENTAGE) IN General Practice 92, ,552 2,225 Oral Surgery 4, , Endodontics 2, , Orthodontics 7, , Pediatric 2, , Periodontics 3, , Prosthodontics 1, , Oral Pathology Public Health Oral Radiology Missing 3 Not applicable 3 0 TOTAL 115, ,655 3,042 Cleveland JL et al. JADA 2012;143(10): Supplemental Data 6

7 Next, we calculated a revised weight (Weight 2) by dividing the revised eligible frame counts by the revised eligible sample sizes within each stratum. Two of the 10 strata and the stratum containing the three dentists with missing specialty group data did not have any respondents; thus, we distributed their weights proportionally across the remaining eight strata. The final weight (Weight 2 adjusted) is poststratified to the sum of 105,655 dentists. Table B4 presents these results. Table B4 Revised eligible number in frame, number of respondents, weight 2 and weight 2 adjusted by specialty. SPECIALTY REVISED ELIGIBLE NO. OF RESPONDENTS WEIGHT 2 (REVISED ELIGIBLE / NO. OF RESPONDENTS) WEIGHT 2 ADJUSTED* General 84,552 2, Practice Oral Surgery 4, Endodontics 2, Orthodontics 6, Pediatric 2, Periodontics 3, Prosthodontics 1, Oral Pathology 30 0 Not applicable Not applicable Public Health Oral Radiology 9 0 Not applicable Not applicable Missing 3 0 Not applicable Not applicable TOTAL 105,655 3, , ,655 * Proportionally distributes the 42 nonrespondents from the three strata that had no respondents into the other eight strata. The survey response rate, adjusted for ineligibility, is 48.7 percent, whereas the weighted response rate, adjusted for eligibility, is a slightly higher 49.7 percent. ### Cleveland JL et al. JADA 2012;143(10): Supplemental Data 7