M Ross1, S Turner2. 1. Edinburgh Dental Institute, University of Edinburgh. 2. 1] Edinburgh Dental Institute, University of Edinburgh [2] Scottish Dental Practice Based Research Network.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate dentists' views on the likely impact of direct access (DA), the clinical competence of hygienists and therapists to work autonomously and possible predictors of such views. DESIGN: Random survey of registered dentists. SETTING: UK, 2014. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A random sample of UK-based dentists registered with the General Dental Council (GDC). A unique-access online questionnaire was developed, with a paper alternative. Email and postal reminders were sent. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measures of positive/negative views regarding the impact of DA and clinical competence of hygienists and therapists to work without a dentist's prescription. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-nine responded (response rate: 27%), 78 (49.1%) of whom were female. No significant sources of response bias were identified. While 122 (77%) had not undergone joint training with dental hygienists or therapists at the undergraduate level, 98 (62.4%) currently worked with a hygienist and 33 (21.0%) with a therapist. Eighty-three (53.2%) disagreed with the GDC decision regarding DA for hygienists, and 94 (59.1%) felt the same regarding therapists. Concern was greatest in respect to diagnosis, treatment planning and restorations. Comments were predominantly negative and reflected concerns over patient safety, what was seen as hygienists' and therapists' inadequate training or expertise, the undermining of the dentist's role, service delivery, the reform being poorly planned, implemented or being a cost-cutting exercise. Experience of teamwork was not predictive of positive/negative views. CONCLUSIONS: Response was low, thus posing a potential threat to the study's representativeness. Many dentists had concerns and reservations about DA which were unrelated to teamwork experience. The dissemination of information on curricula and scope of practice may help allay such concerns, as may a greater emphasis on joint training at both the undergraduate level and within continuing professional development programmes.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate dentists' views on the likely impact of direct access (DA), the clinical competence of hygienists and therapists to work autonomously and possible predictors of such views. DESIGN: Random survey of registered dentists. SETTING: UK, 2014. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A random sample of UK-based dentists registered with the General Dental Council (GDC). A unique-access online questionnaire was developed, with a paper alternative. Email and postal reminders were sent. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measures of positive/negative views regarding the impact of DA and clinical competence of hygienists and therapists to work without a dentist's prescription. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-nine responded (response rate: 27%), 78 (49.1%) of whom were female. No significant sources of response bias were identified. While 122 (77%) had not undergone joint training with dental hygienists or therapists at the undergraduate level, 98 (62.4%) currently worked with a hygienist and 33 (21.0%) with a therapist. Eighty-three (53.2%) disagreed with the GDC decision regarding DA for hygienists, and 94 (59.1%) felt the same regarding therapists. Concern was greatest in respect to diagnosis, treatment planning and restorations. Comments were predominantly negative and reflected concerns over patient safety, what was seen as hygienists' and therapists' inadequate training or expertise, the undermining of the dentist's role, service delivery, the reform being poorly planned, implemented or being a cost-cutting exercise. Experience of teamwork was not predictive of positive/negative views. CONCLUSIONS: Response was low, thus posing a potential threat to the study's representativeness. Many dentists had concerns and reservations about DA which were unrelated to teamwork experience. The dissemination of information on curricula and scope of practice may help allay such concerns, as may a greater emphasis on joint training at both the undergraduate level and within continuing professional development programmes.