201 The Development of an Oral Health Nursing Tool in Patients with a Psychotic Disorder Despite the fifth finding of our study, that oral health care comes with financial costs that patients may not be able to meet, oral health management (e.g., dental visits, dental hygienist visits, materials to maintain oral health) is nevertheless important to prevent problems in later stages of illness as well as physical problems (such as problems in diabetes type 2). During admission, patients should be more adequately evaluated and supplied with essential items (such as toothbrushes, toothpaste, and mouthwash). Currently, these costs fall to patients, unless they have dental insurance (in the Netherlands). Previous research has demonstrated that many patients are unable to afford additional dental insurance [8,23]. This seems to be a bigger social problem that needs more attention. Policy- and decision-makers should consider providing free dental care for people with psychotic disorders, given the importance of oral health to overall health. The government, municipalities, and mental health organisations—together with health insurance agencies—should work on adjusting services regarding insurance plans and alleviating the financial problems of this vulnerable group of young patients. Strengths and limitations of this Study Within this study, we applied various populations and methods for triangulation, which enhanced the validity of the findings by combining diverse methods. This approach is crucial for mitigating the inherent biases that can arise when relying solely on a single method, as is often seen in more conventional qualitative research. The broad range of information sources utilised in this study, coupled with the application of the MCDM methodology, provided a robust means of scrutinising tools and enhanced the ecological validity. The methods used in this study and the results contribute to the pragmatic validity of the brochure with an awareness screener. Pragmatic validity refers to the extent to which it can be expected that the respective action will yield the intended outcome, rather than the actual effectiveness of actions taken [44]. Thus, the outcomes of this research indicate the need for further research. During the decision-making process in this study, the MCDM approach was adopted. Within the MCDM framework, weights are assigned to various criteria upon which scoring is based [29]. Criteria such as sensitisation and knowledge could potentially be counted twice. However, this was deemed to be not conducive to 6
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw