S A Al-Habsi1, G J Roberts, N Attari, S Parekh. 1. Unit of Paediatric Dentistry, UCL Eastman Dental Institute and Hospital, 256 Gray's Inn road, London WC1X 8LD. salwa_alhabsi@hotmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the attitudes, knowledge and practices of general dental practitioners (GDPs), specialists and consultants in paediatric dentistry in London, towards child protection. Additionally, to determine if children attending paediatric dental casualty at the Eastman Dental Hospital (EDH) and those who need treatment of caries under general anaesthesia (GA) are on the child protection register (CPR). DESIGN: The survey was conducted by postal questionnaires with 14 closed questions. A total of 228 dentists were invited to participate in the study. Children who attended EDH and required treatment under GA or at paediatric dental casualty were checked against the CPR. RESULTS: The respond rate was 46% (105/228). Overall 15% (16/105) of dentists had seen at least one patient with suspected child abuse in the last six months, but only 7% (7/105) referred or reported cases to child protection services. Reasons for dentists not referring included: fear of impact on practice (10%; 11/105); fear of violence to child (66%; 69/105); fear of litigation (28%; 29/105); fear of family violence against them (26%; 27/105); fear of consequences to the child (56%; 59/105); lack of knowledge regarding the procedures for referral (68%; 71/105); and lack of certainty about the diagnosis (86%; 90/105). Of the 220 children attending for dental GA and casualty from October 2004 to March 2005, one child was found to be on the CPR. CONCLUSION: More information and training is required to raise awareness of the potential importance of the role of dentists in child protection. Improved communication between dental and medical departments is important for safeguarding children.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the attitudes, knowledge and practices of general dental practitioners (GDPs), specialists and consultants in paediatric dentistry in London, towards child protection. Additionally, to determine if children attending paediatric dental casualty at the Eastman Dental Hospital (EDH) and those who need treatment of caries under general anaesthesia (GA) are on the child protection register (CPR). DESIGN: The survey was conducted by postal questionnaires with 14 closed questions. A total of 228 dentists were invited to participate in the study. Children who attended EDH and required treatment under GA or at paediatric dental casualty were checked against the CPR. RESULTS: The respond rate was 46% (105/228). Overall 15% (16/105) of dentists had seen at least one patient with suspected child abuse in the last six months, but only 7% (7/105) referred or reported cases to child protection services. Reasons for dentists not referring included: fear of impact on practice (10%; 11/105); fear of violence to child (66%; 69/105); fear of litigation (28%; 29/105); fear of family violence against them (26%; 27/105); fear of consequences to the child (56%; 59/105); lack of knowledge regarding the procedures for referral (68%; 71/105); and lack of certainty about the diagnosis (86%; 90/105). Of the 220 children attending for dental GA and casualty from October 2004 to March 2005, one child was found to be on the CPR. CONCLUSION: More information and training is required to raise awareness of the potential importance of the role of dentists in child protection. Improved communication between dental and medical departments is important for safeguarding children.
Authors: Mohammad Hasan Sahebihagh; Seyedeh Zahra Hosseini; Mina Hosseinzadeh; Seyed Morteza Shamshirgaran Journal: Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery Date: 2017-07