Tammie J Gibson1, David A Nash. 1. US Public Health Service, Lawton Indian Hospital, Lawton, Okla, USA. tgibson232@aol.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the periodicity of the recall examination and frequency and most often used technique for cleaning children's teeth. The resulting data were compared to current scientific evidence and recommendations to determine the appropriateness of practices by board-certified pediatric dentists. METHODS: A 28-item questionnaire was mailed to the 1,034 members of the College of Diplomates of the American Board of Pediatric Dentistry residing in the United States. This report describes data pertaining to recall appointment periodicity, frequency and method of cleaning children's teeth, use of auxiliaries in prophylaxis, and instruction in oral hygiene. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-nine surveys were returned, tabulated, and analyzed. Only 1% of dentists did not have an active recall program, 95% used a 6-month recall interval, and the remaining 5% had an interval ranging from 3 to 18 months. Hygienists were employed in 62% of pediatric dentistry practices. Pumice/rubber cup prophylaxis was employed routinely at recall by 67% of respondents; 24% reported the use of toothbrush and dental floss for cleaning; the other 9% reported no routine method for prophylaxis. The average fee for a pumice/rubber cup prophylaxis was dollar 42.55, and dollar 40.31 for a toothbrush prophylaxis. One hundred percent of pediatric dentists reported providing oral hygiene instruction for their patients. The instruction was directed to both parent and child in 97% of practices, child only in 2% of practices, and the parent only in 1% of practices. CONCLUSIONS: Recall intervals were not based on specific criteria related to individual patient needs. The majority of pediatric dentists employed the pumice/rubber cup prophylaxis method for cleaning children's teeth.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the periodicity of the recall examination and frequency and most often used technique for cleaning children's teeth. The resulting data were compared to current scientific evidence and recommendations to determine the appropriateness of practices by board-certified pediatric dentists. METHODS: A 28-item questionnaire was mailed to the 1,034 members of the College of Diplomates of the American Board of Pediatric Dentistry residing in the United States. This report describes data pertaining to recall appointment periodicity, frequency and method of cleaning children's teeth, use of auxiliaries in prophylaxis, and instruction in oral hygiene. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-nine surveys were returned, tabulated, and analyzed. Only 1% of dentists did not have an active recall program, 95% used a 6-month recall interval, and the remaining 5% had an interval ranging from 3 to 18 months. Hygienists were employed in 62% of pediatric dentistry practices. Pumice/rubber cup prophylaxis was employed routinely at recall by 67% of respondents; 24% reported the use of toothbrush and dental floss for cleaning; the other 9% reported no routine method for prophylaxis. The average fee for a pumice/rubber cup prophylaxis was dollar 42.55, and dollar 40.31 for a toothbrush prophylaxis. One hundred percent of pediatric dentists reported providing oral hygiene instruction for their patients. The instruction was directed to both parent and child in 97% of practices, child only in 2% of practices, and the parent only in 1% of practices. CONCLUSIONS: Recall intervals were not based on specific criteria related to individual patient needs. The majority of pediatric dentists employed the pumice/rubber cup prophylaxis method for cleaning children's teeth.
Authors: Raymond A Kuthy; Golnaz Kavand; Elizabeth T Momany; Michael P Jones; Natoshia M Askelson; Donald L Chi; George L Wehby; Peter C Damiano Journal: J Public Health Dent Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 1.821