BACKGROUND: Women make up about 14 percent of general dentists in the United States, and the proportion is projected to exceed 29 percent by 2020. METHODS: The authors obtained dental benefits claims data from the Washington Dental Service (WDS), Seattle, and used them to examine the practice patterns of 265 women and 1,947 men engaged in general dentistry for at least 26 days in 2001. Practice variables of interest included age, days worked, procedures performed and total income from WDS reimbursements and patient copayments. The number, age and sex of patients treated also were obtained. Using productivity data, the authors also estimated the potential impact of an increase in the percentage of female dentists in the state. RESULTS: The authors found no differences between male and female dentists in the number of procedures per patient, income per patient or income per day of work. Frequency distributions of various services were highly similar for both groups. Multiple regression models showed no influence of dentist's sex on total income. However, the mean and median numbers of days worked were about 10 percent lower for female dentists than for male dentists. This difference was consistent with the finding that female dentists treated approximately 10 percent fewer patients, performed about 10 percent fewer procedures and had a combined income of about 10 percent less than that of male dentists. CONCLUSION: Practice patterns of male and female dentists generally were equivalent in this WDS population. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Female and male dentists provided a similar range of services and earned an equal income per patient treated and per day worked. However, women worked fewer days per year than did men, irrespective of age. If the dental work force and practice patterns remain unchanged otherwise, the total number of patients treated per dentist will decrease slightly as women make up an increasing proportion of dentists.
BACKGROUND:Women make up about 14 percent of general dentists in the United States, and the proportion is projected to exceed 29 percent by 2020. METHODS: The authors obtained dental benefits claims data from the Washington Dental Service (WDS), Seattle, and used them to examine the practice patterns of 265 women and 1,947 men engaged in general dentistry for at least 26 days in 2001. Practice variables of interest included age, days worked, procedures performed and total income from WDS reimbursements and patient copayments. The number, age and sex of patients treated also were obtained. Using productivity data, the authors also estimated the potential impact of an increase in the percentage of female dentists in the state. RESULTS: The authors found no differences between male and female dentists in the number of procedures per patient, income per patient or income per day of work. Frequency distributions of various services were highly similar for both groups. Multiple regression models showed no influence of dentist's sex on total income. However, the mean and median numbers of days worked were about 10 percent lower for female dentists than for male dentists. This difference was consistent with the finding that female dentists treated approximately 10 percent fewer patients, performed about 10 percent fewer procedures and had a combined income of about 10 percent less than that of male dentists. CONCLUSION: Practice patterns of male and female dentists generally were equivalent in this WDS population. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Female and male dentists provided a similar range of services and earned an equal income per patient treated and per day worked. However, women worked fewer days per year than did men, irrespective of age. If the dental work force and practice patterns remain unchanged otherwise, the total number of patients treated per dentist will decrease slightly as women make up an increasing proportion of dentists.
Authors: Joseph L Riley; Valeria V Gordan; D Brad Rindal; Jeffrey L Fellows; Craig T Ajmo; Craig Amundson; Gerald A Anderson; Gregg H Gilbert Journal: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol Date: 2010-05-18 Impact factor: 3.383
Authors: Joseph L Riley; Valeria V Gordan; Kathleen M Rouisse; Jocelyn McClelland; Gregg H Gilbert Journal: J Am Dent Assoc Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 3.634
Authors: Tamara C Valovich McLeod; Kenneth C Lam; R Curtis Bay; Eric L Sauers; Alison R Snyder Valier Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2012 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Michael S McCracken; Valeria V Gordan; Mark S Litaker; Ellen Funkhouser; Jeffrey L Fellows; Douglass G Shamp; Vibeke Qvist; Jeffrey S Meral; Gregg H Gilbert Journal: J Am Dent Assoc Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 3.634
Authors: Brandon Burke; Ahmad Mohammad Hamdan; Eser Tufekci; Bhavna Shroff; Al M Best; Steven J Lindauer Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 2.079