BACKGROUND: Attitudes and views are critical to the adoption of innovation. Although there have been broadening calls for a standardized dental diagnostic terminology, little is known about the views of private practice dental team members regarding the adoption of such a terminology. METHODS: The authors developed a survey by using validated questions identified through literature review. Domain experts' input allowed for further modifications. The authors administered the final survey electronically to 814 team members at a multioffice practice based in the US Pacific Northwest. RESULTS: Response proportion was 92%. The survey had excellent reliability (Cronbach α coefficient = 0.87). Results suggested that participants showed, in general, positive attitudes and beliefs about using a standardized diagnostic terminology in their practices. Additional written comments by participants highlighted the potential for improved communication with use of the terminology. CONCLUSIONS: Dental care providers and staff in 1 multioffice practice showed positive attitudes about the use of a diagnostic terminology; specifically, they believed it would improve communication between the dentist and patient, as well as among providers, while expressing some concerns about whether using standardized dental diagnostic terms helps clinicians to deliver better dental care. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: As the dental profession is advancing toward the use of standardized diagnostic terminology, successful implementation will require that dental team leaders prepare their teams by gauging their attitude about the use of such a terminology.
BACKGROUND: Attitudes and views are critical to the adoption of innovation. Although there have been broadening calls for a standardized dental diagnostic terminology, little is known about the views of private practice dental team members regarding the adoption of such a terminology. METHODS: The authors developed a survey by using validated questions identified through literature review. Domain experts' input allowed for further modifications. The authors administered the final survey electronically to 814 team members at a multioffice practice based in the US Pacific Northwest. RESULTS: Response proportion was 92%. The survey had excellent reliability (Cronbach α coefficient = 0.87). Results suggested that participants showed, in general, positive attitudes and beliefs about using a standardized diagnostic terminology in their practices. Additional written comments by participants highlighted the potential for improved communication with use of the terminology. CONCLUSIONS: Dental care providers and staff in 1 multioffice practice showed positive attitudes about the use of a diagnostic terminology; specifically, they believed it would improve communication between the dentist and patient, as well as among providers, while expressing some concerns about whether using standardized dental diagnostic terms helps clinicians to deliver better dental care. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: As the dental profession is advancing toward the use of standardized diagnostic terminology, successful implementation will require that dental team leaders prepare their teams by gauging their attitude about the use of such a terminology.
Keywords:
Dentistry; International Classification of Diseases; Systematized Nomenclature of Dentistry; Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine; adoption; attitudes and beliefs; diagnostic terminology; electronic health record; innovation; leadership
Authors: Elsbeth Kalenderian; Rachel L Ramoni; Joel M White; Meta E Schoonheim-Klein; Paul C Stark; Nicole S Kimmes; Gregory G Zeller; George P Willis; Muhammad F Walji Journal: J Dent Educ Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 2.264
Authors: Joel M White; Elsbeth Kalenderian; Paul C Stark; Rachel L Ramoni; Ram Vaderhobli; Muhammad F Walji Journal: J Dent Educ Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 2.264
Authors: Muhammad F Walji; Elsbeth Kalenderian; Duong Tran; Krishna K Kookal; Vickie Nguyen; Oluwabunmi Tokede; Joel M White; Ram Vaderhobli; Rachel Ramoni; Paul C Stark; Nicole S Kimmes; Meta E Schoonheim-Klein; Vimla L Patel Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2012-06-29 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Rachel B Ramoni; Jini Etolue; Oluwabunmi Tokede; Lyle McClellan; Kristen Simmons; Alfa Yansane; Joel M White; Muhammad F Walji; Elsbeth Kalenderian Journal: J Am Dent Assoc Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 3.634
Authors: Enihomo Obadan-Udoh; Lisa Simon; Jini Etolue; Oluwabunmi Tokede; Joel White; Heiko Spallek; Muhammad Walji; Elsbeth Kalenderian Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 3.390