| Literature DB >> 34845437 |
Afsheen Maqsood1, Muhammad Shahrukh Khan Sadiq1, Daud Mirza1, Naseer Ahmed2,3, Abhishek Lal4, Mohammad Khursheed Alam5, Mohamad Syahrizal Bin Halim6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study was aimed at assessing the impact of teledentistry, its application, and trends in uplifting dental practice and clinical care around the world. Material and Methods. The present observational study comprised of an electronic survey distributed among dental professionals around the globe. The validated survey form consisted of a total 26 questions with 5-point Likert scale response. The questionnaire used was divided into four domains: usefulness of teledentistry for patients, its usefulness in dental practice, its capacity to improve the existing practice, and the concerns attached to its use. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS-25. ANOVA test was used to assess the effect of independent variables on dependent variables. A p value of ≤0.05 was taken as statistically significant.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34845437 PMCID: PMC8627361 DOI: 10.1155/2021/5437237
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Distribution of responses from different countries.
Distribution of responses concerning about data security and patient consent among participants (n = 506).
| S.no | Item | Very concerned | Little concerned | Not feeling either way | Not particularly concerned | Not concerned at all |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Gaining patient consent for teleconsultation | 295 (58.3) | 115 (22.7) | 54 (10.7) | 21 (4.2) | 21 (4.2) |
| 2. | Confidentiality when data are sent online | 337 (66.6) | 134 (26.5) | 7 (1.4) | 7 (1.4) | 21 (4.2) |
| 3. | Potential for digital forgery | 303 (59.9) | 100 (19.8) | 68 (13.4) | 21 (4.2) | 14 (2.8) |
| 4. | Incompatible hardware and software | 272 (53.8) | 164 (32.4) | 42 (8.3) | 7 (1.4) | 21 (4.2) |
| 5. | Reliability of teledental equipment | 264 (52.2) | 172 (34.0) | 56 (11.1) | 7 (1.4) | 7 (1.4) |
Distribution of responses about the impact of teledentistry to improve practice (n = 506).
| S. no | Item | Disagree strongly | Disagree | Neutral | Agree | Agree strongly |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Teledentistry would help in patient diagnosis | 33 (6.5) | 95 (18.8) | 256 (50.6) | 102 (20.2) | 20 (4.0) |
| 2 | Teledentistry would help shorten the waiting list | 7 (1.4) | 40 (7.9) | 56 (11.1) | 363 (71.7) | 40 (7.9) |
| 3 | Teledentistry would enhance dental guidelines and advice | 7 (1.4) | 41 (8.1) | 116 (22.9) | 295 (58.3) | 47 (9.3) |
| 4 | Teledentistry would improve the interaction between peers | 7 (1.4) | 48 (9.5) | 125 (24.7) | 265 (52.4) | 61 (12.1) |
| 5 | Teledentistry would provide a safe atmosphere for practicing dentistry (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic) | 7 (1.4) | 21 (4.2) | 62 (12.3) | 278 (54.9) | 138 (27.3) |
| 6 | Teledentistry would make patient's referral more efficient | 7 (1.4) | 54 (10.7) | 82 (16.2) | 274 (54.2) | 89 (17.6) |
Application and usefulness of teledentistry for dental practice (n = 506).
| S. no | Item | Disagree | Disagree | Neutral | Agree | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Teledentistry would enhance clinical training and continuing education | 7 (1.4) | 75 (14.8) | 165 (32.6) | 210 (41.5) | 49 (9.7) |
| 2 | Teledentistry would reduce costs for the dental practices | 7 (1.4) | 28 (5.5) | 117 (23.1) | 284 (56.1) | 70 (13.8) |
| 3 | Teledentistry would increase treatment time spent with the patient | 7 (1.4) | 82 (16.2) | 145 (28.7) | 230 (45.5) | 42 (8.3) |
| 4 | Teledentistry would necessitate an extra appointment for taking photographs | 14 (2.8) | 82 (16.2) | 110 (21.7) | 273 (54.0) | 27 (5.3) |
| 5 | Teledentistry would save time compared with a referral letter | 7 (1.4) | 28 (5.5) | 116 (22.9) | 307 (60.7) | 48 (9.5) |
| 6 | Teledentistry would be too expensive to set up | 14 (2.8) | 186 (36.8) | 182 (36.0) | 82 (16.2) | 42 (8.3) |
| 7 | Teledentistry would provide sufficient information about patient illness | 28 (5.5) | 82 (16.2) | 193 (38.1) | 163 (32.2) | 40 (7.9) |
Application and usefulness of teledentistry for patients (n = 506).
| S. no | Item | Disagree | Disagree | Neutral | Agree | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Teledentistry would save money for patients | 14 (2.8) | 54 (10.7) | 138 (27.3) | 279 (55.1) | 21 (4.2) |
| 2 | Teledentistry would improve communication with patients | 32 (6.32) | 30 (5.92) | 124 (24.5) | 272 (53.8) | 48 (9.5) |
| 3 | Teledentistry would be helpful patient education | 24 (4.74) | 25 (4.94) | 69 (13.6) | 320 (63.2) | 68 (13.4) |
| 4 | Teledentistry would help to avoid unnecessary travel to dental clinic | 8 (1.58) | 20 (3.95) | 55 (10.9) | 320 (63.2) | 103 (20.4) |
| 5 | Teledentistry would be helpful in monitoring the patient's condition | 7 (1.4) | 54 (10.7) | 95 (18.8) | 322 (63.6) | 28 (5.5) |
| 6 | Teledentistry would be convenient and well received by patients | 34 (6.71) | 34 (6.71) | 194 (38.3) | 188 (37.2) | 56 (11.1) |
| 7 | Teledentistry would be useful for patients in remote areas | 16 (3.16) | 19 (3.75) | 129 (25.5) | 191 (37.7) | 151 (29.8) |
| 8 | Teledentistry should be covered by dental insurance plans | 24 (4.74) | 24 (4.74) | 199 (39.3) | 204 (40.3) | 55 (10.9) |
Comparison of independent variables with domains of teledentistry among participants (n = 506).
| Variable | Data security and patient consent | Capability of teledentistry to improve dental practice | Usefulness of teledentistry for dental practice | Usefulness of teledentistry for patients |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ||||
| 20–34 | 7.81 ± 3.91 | 21.36 ± 4.63 | 23.87 ± 5.96 | 28.64 ± 6.64 |
| 35–44 | 9.66 ± 6.28 | 22.19 ± 5.44 | 23.44 ± 6.53 | 30.48 ± 6.29 |
| 45–54 | 9.82 ± 4.64 | 24.6 ± 5.14 | 24.76 ± 3.07 | 28.76 ± 3.07 |
| 55–64 | 5.65 ± 0.48 | 24.8 ± 3.86 | 25.4 ± 3.87 | 32.6 ± 1.92 |
|
| 0.001∗∗ | 0.001∗∗ | 0.035∗ | 0.015∗ |
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 7.64 ± 3.68 | 21.84 ± 4.85 | 23.99 ± 6.21 | 29.26 ± 6.69 |
| Male | 9.9 ± 6.57 | 21.67 ± 5.42 | 23.47 ± 6.14 | 29.55 ± 5.88 |
|
| 0.103 | 0.771 | 0.208 | 0.181 |
| Qualification | ||||
| Consultant/specialist | 7.8 ± 4.17 | 23.09 ± 5.04 | 24.76 ± 6.42 | 30.41 ± 6.06 |
| General dental practitioner | 8.43 ± 5.06 | 21.15 ± 4.6 | 23.52 ± 5.96 | 29.14 ± 6.49 |
| Resident/graduate research | 8.93 ± 4.98 | 21.04 ± 5.25 | 22.54 ± 5.82 | 27.54 ± 6.22 |
| Other | 7.99 ± 2.05 | 20.99 ± 1.02 | 24.13 ± 2.05 | 27.58 ± 3.59 |
|
| 0.003∗∗ | 0.001∗∗ | 0.004∗∗ | 0.001∗∗ |
| Work experience (in years) | ||||
| 1–5 | 7.56 ± 3.73 | 21.34 ± 4.54 | 23.88 ± 6 | 28.9 ± 6.57 |
| 6–10 | 10.01 ± 6.19 | 22.07 ± 5.9 | 23.67 ± 5.84 | 29.35 ± 6.84 |
| 11–15 | 9.18 ± 5.78 | 23.48 ± 3.85 | 24.03 ± 4.52 | 30.81 ± 5.73 |
| More than 16 | 7.87 ± 4.15 | 22.14 ± 6.13 | 24.78 ± 6.51 | 30.37 ± 3.93 |
|
| 0.002∗∗ | 0.027∗ | 0.087 | 0.006∗∗ |
∗ p value ≤ 0.05; ∗∗p value < 0.000; SD: standard deviation.
Figure 2Distribution of preferred teledentistry communication tool among participants (n = 506).
Figure 3Distribution of teledentistry use in different dental specialties.