Dataset Information

Multifaceted impact of COVID-19 on dental practice: American dental care professionals prepared and ready during unprecedented challenges.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the multifaceted impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on dental practices and their readiness to resume dental practice during arduous circumstances.

Methods

The authors distributed an observational survey study approved by The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Institutional Review Board to dental care practitioners and their office staff members using Qualtrics XM software. The survey was completed anonymously. The authors analyzed the data using R statistical computing software, χ² test, and Wilcoxon rank sum test.

Results

Nearly all participants (98%) felt prepared to resume dental practice and were confident of the safety precautions (96%). Only 21% of dentists felt the COVID-19 pandemic changed their dental treatment protocols, with at least two-thirds agreeing that precautions would influence their efficiency adversely. Although most participants were satisfied with the resources their dental practice provided for support during the pandemic (95%), most were concerned about the impact on their general health and safety (77%) and to their dental practice (90%), found working during the pandemic difficult (≈ 60%), and agreed there are challenges and long-term impacts on the dental profession (> 75%).

Conclusions

Dental care professionals, although affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and at high risk of developing COVID-19, were prepared to resume dental practice during most challenging circumstances.

Practical implications

The pandemic has affected dental care practitioners substantially; thus, there is need to formulate psychological interventions and safety precautions to mitigate its impact. Further research should evaluate the long-term effects on dentistry and oral health and interceptive measures for better communication and programming around future challenges.

SUBMITTER: Bsoul EA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8520822 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Little is known about how health care professionals deal with ethical challenges in mental health care, especially when not making use of a formal ethics support service. Understanding this is important in order to be able to support the professionals, to improve the quality of care, and to know in which way future ethics support services might be helpful.Within a project on ethics, coercion and psychiatry, we executed a focus group interview study at seven departments with 65 health care professionals and managers. We performed a systematic and open qualitative analysis focusing on the question: 'How do health care professionals deal with ethical challenges?' We deliberately did not present a fixed definition or theory of ethical challenge.We categorized relevant topics into three subthemes: 1) Identification and presence of ethical challenges; 2) What do the participants actually do when dealing with an ethical challenge?; and 3) The significance of facing ethical challenges. Results varied from dealing with ethical challenges every day and appreciating it as a positive part of working in mental health care, to experiencing ethical challenges as paralyzing burdens that cause a lot of stress and hinder constructive team cooperation. Some participants reported that they do not have the time and that they lack a specific methodology. Quite often, informal and retrospective ad-hoc meetings in small teams were organized. Participants struggled with what makes a challenge an ethical challenge and whether it differs from a professional challenge. When dealing with ethical challenges, a number of participants experienced difficulties handling disagreement in a constructive way. Furthermore, some participants plead for more attention for underlying intentions and justifications of treatment decisions.The interviewed health care professionals dealt with ethical challenges in many different ways, often in an informal, implicit and reactive manner. This study revealed nine different categories of what health care professionals implicitly or explicitly conceive as 'ethical challenges'. Future research should focus on how ethics support services, such as ethics reflection groups or moral case deliberation, can be of help with respect to dealing with ethical challenges and value disagreements in a constructive way.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Board of Emergency Medicine require clinical ethics education in residency training, instruction varies widely. We assessed the educational preparedness of trainees in emergency medicine to address ethics challenges common to their field.MethodsThe survey assessed two outcomes: 1) knowledge of specific ethical challenges and 2) perceived educational preparedness, across five ethics areas: 1) informed consent and decisional-capacity assessment, 2) surrogate decision making, 3) interpretation of advanced directives, 4) withdrawing and/or withholding life support, and 5) presumed consent for emergency treatment. Clinical vignettes, revised through expert panel review and pilot testing, were utilized to evaluate these areas. The final instrument was administered via Web link to emergency medicine residents and recent graduates through adverts within Emergency Medicine Residency Association and Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) newsletters and social media platforms. Additionally, targeted e-mails through the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine, the Clerkship Directors of Emergency Medicine, and the SAEM Ethics Committee listservs encouraged survey distribution. Analyses involved one-way analysis of variance for overall knowledge scores and chi-square tests for categorical outcomes. Multivariable regression models tested associations between respondent characteristics and outcomes.ResultsThere were 302 participants of which 34% reported having a dedicated ethics module within their residency curriculum. The mean (±SD) knowledge score was 59.7% (±12.8%); assessing decisional capacity was the most difficult topic for respondents as only 1% both correctly addressed the general issue and identified the correct plan of action. Participants having a dedicated ethics module perceived themselves better prepared, although there was no association between having a dedicated ethics module and knowledge scores.ConclusionsGaps in clinical ethics knowledge appear prevalent among emergency medicine trainees, and few programs have dedicated ethics modules. Greater study is needed to understand and remedy clinical ethics knowledge shortfalls.