Dataset Information

Indicators for dental appointment scheduling in primary health care: a national cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Integrated dental services within the Health System, particularly at primary health care, are crucial to reverse the current impact of oral diseases, which are among the most prevalent diseases worldwide. However, the use of dental services is determined by complex phenomena related to the individual, the environment and practices in which care is offered. Therefore, factors associated with dental appointments scheduling can affect positively or negatively the use of dental services. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the indicators for dental appointment scheduling in Primary Health Care (PHC).

Methods

The present is a cross-sectional analytical study that used data from the external assessment of the third cycle of the National Program for Improving Access and Quality in Primary Care (PMAQ-AB), carried out between 2017 and 2018, in Brazil. The final sample consisted of 85,231 patients and 22,475 Oral Health teams (OHTs). The outcome variable was the fact that the user sought for a dental appointment at the Primary Health Care Unit. A multilevel analysis was carried out to verify the association between individual variables (related to users) and contextual variables (related to the OHTs) in relation to the outcome.

Results

Only 58.1% of the users interviewed at these Primary Health Care Units seek the available dental care. The variables with the greatest effect on the outcome were the patient's age up to 42 years old (OR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.96-2.10), at individual level, and 'oral health teams that assisted no more than a single family health team (FHT)' (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.23-1.36) at contextual level. Other variables were also associated with the outcome, but with a smaller effect size.

Conclusion

In conclusion, users' age and work process of OHT were indicators for dental appointment scheduling. Our results suggest that when OHT put the National Oral Health Policy guidelines into practice, by assisting only one FHT, the chance for PHC users seeking dental appointments is higher than OHTs that assist more than one FHT. Regarding age, patients aged up to 42 years are more likely to seek an appointment with a dentist.

SUBMITTER: Melo EA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8656053 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCost-sharing in health insurance plans creates incentives for patients to shop for lower prices, but it is unknown what price information patients can obtain when scheduling office visits.ObjectiveTo determine whether new patients can obtain price information for a primary care visit and identify variation across insurance types, offices, and geographic areas.DesignSimulated patient methodology in which trained interviewers posed as non-elderly adults seeking new patient primary care appointments. Caller insurance type (employer-sponsored insurance [ESI], Marketplace, or uninsured) and plan were experimentally manipulated. Callers who were offered a visit asked for price information. Unadjusted means and regression-adjusted differences by insurance, office types, and geography were calculated.ParticipantsCalls to a representative sample of primary care offices in ten states in 2014: Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas (N = 7865).Main measuresCallers recorded whether they were able to obtain a price. If not, they recorded whether they were referred to other sources for price information.Key resultsOverall, 61.8% of callers with ESI were able to obtain a price, versus 89.2% of uninsured and 47.3% of Marketplace callers (P < 0.001 for differences). Price information was also more readily available in small offices and in counties with high uninsured rates. Among callers not receiving a price, 72.1% of callers with ESI were referred to other sources (billing office or insurance company), versus 25.8% of uninsured and 50.9% of Marketplace callers (P < 0.001). A small fraction of insured callers were told their visit would be free. If not free, mean visit prices ranged from $157 for uninsured to $165 for ESI (P < 0.05). Prices were significantly lower at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), smaller offices, and in counties with high uninsured and low-income rates.ConclusionsPrice information is often unavailable for privately insured patients seeking primary care visits at the time a visit is scheduled.

Project description:Background20-80% of adults presenting to a dental clinic experience anxiety. Negative past dental experiences and environmental factors such as the waiting area of a dental clinic or sound of a drill are commonly considered triggering factors for anxiety. Anxiety management strategies are considered a part of routine dental procedure, due to increased prevalence and compromised patient care. Hence the aim of the present study is to identify the prevalence and variables associated with dental anxiety and their management in patients visiting the primary care dental clinics in Bahrain.MethodFour hundred and eighty participants were included. A 3-part questionnaire deciphered the demographic characteristics of the participants, the dental procedure undertaken, the level of anxiety, and the management strategy used by the dentist. The pre and post-treatment MDAS scores were recorded. Paired t test, ANOVA and Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to test the level of significance between the variables and the mean MDAS scores. The p ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsThe prevalence of dental anxiety was 23.7% with moderate anxiety, and 11.4% with high anxiety. Females presented with a higher mean MDAS both pre and post-treatment compared with males. A statistically significant difference between the pre and post-treatment MDAS scores were observed in educated patients less than 50 years of age. Those with unpleasant previous dental experience showed statistically significant difference. Analyses of anxiety management techniques showed that single techniques worked better than combination techniques. Rest and breaks combined with any other technique of choice showed significant reduction in the MDAS scores post treatment.ConclusionTo conclude, all patients attending the dental clinic present with some level of anxiety that necessitates the dentist to use anxiety management strategies. Non-pharmacological methods that are non-invasive must be the first choice. Rests and breaks, with any technique of choice provides the best possible anxiety management. It is possible to achieve the desired anxiety reduction in single visit to complete the planned dental intervention, other than in patients who are dental phobic.

Project description:BackgroundCommunity pharmacists' contribution in health maintenance and promotion is significant but more studies are still needed to evaluate their role as healthcare providers.ObjectivesOur primary objective was to assess knowledge, attitude, and practice among community pharmacists in Lebanon towards dental care. Secondary objectives included assessing the barriers to a good dental care practice and assess their educational needs for oral health counseling.MethodsA national cross-sectional study was carried out using an online questionnaire and targeting community pharmacists in Lebanon. Five, three and six questions were used to assess pharmacists' perceived knowledge, attitude and practice respectively. Stepwise linear regressions were conducted taking each time a different scale score as the dependent variable.Results497 (78.88%) pharmacists completed the survey (62% females). More than half (53.3%) exhibited good perceived knowledge, 39% a positive attitude and 47.3% a good practice regarding oral health. Pharmacists reported a good perceived knowledge regarding common oral conditions (good, very good and excellent knowledge: 73.2%). Most of the pharmacists (86.52%) perceived oral health promotion as an important part of their services. Moreover, 28.77% (n = 143) of pharmacists declared having difficulties in obtaining oral health information. The main barriers to a good practice included limited interaction between dentists and pharmacists and lack of training regarding oral health. The multivariable analyses showed a significant positive intercorrelation between perceived knowledge, attitude and practice. Working in the pharmacy for more than 40 h a week was associated with higher perceived knowledge (Beta = 2.846). Having a PhD degree was associated with lower practice scores (Beta = 3.676), whereas female gender was associated with lower practice scores (Beta = 2.334).ConclusionsPharmacists have the overall required knowledge and attitude to play an important role in the patients' counseling towards dental care.

Project description:BACKGROUND: The performance of Primary Care Trusts in England is assessed and published using a number of different performance indicators. Our study has two broad purposes. Firstly, to find out whether pairs of indicators that purport to measure similar aspects of quality are correlated (as would be expected if they are both valid measures of the same construct). Secondly, we wanted to find out whether broad (global) indicators correlated with any particular features of Primary Care Trusts, such as expenditure per capita. METHODS: Cross sectional quantitative analysis using data from six 2004/05 PCT performance indicators for 303 English Primary Care Trusts from four sources in the public domain: Star Rating, aggregated Quality and Outcomes Framework scores, Dr Foster mortality index, Dr Foster equity index (heart by-pass and hip replacements), NHS Litigation Authority Risk Management standards and Patient Satisfaction scores from the Star Ratings. Forward stepwise multiple regression analysis to determine the effect of Primary Care Trust characteristics on performance. RESULTS: Star Rating and Quality and Outcomes Framework total, both summary measures of global quality, were not correlated with each other (F = 0.66, p = 0.57). There were however positive correlations between Quality and Outcomes Framework total and patient satisfaction (r = 0.61, p < 0.001) and between screening/'additional services' indicators on the Star Ratings and Quality and Outcomes Framework (F = 24, p < 0.001). There was no correlation between different measures of access to services. Likewise we found no relationship between either Star Rating or Litigation Authority Standards and hospital mortality (F = 0.61, p = 0.61; F = 0.31, p = 0.73). CONCLUSION: Performance assessment in healthcare remains on the Government's agenda, with new core and developmental standards set to replace the Star Ratings in 2006. Yet the results of this analysis provide little evidence that the current indicators have sufficient construct validity to measure the underlying concept of quality, except when the specific area of screening is considered.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To identify a generic set of face valid quality indicators for primary care mental health services which reflect a multi-stakeholder perspective and can be used for facilitating quality improvement. DESIGN:Modified two-round postal Delphi questionnaire. SETTING:Geographical spread across Great Britain. PARTICIPANTS:One hundred and fifteen panellists representing 11 different stakeholder groups within primary care mental health services (clinical psychologist, health and social care commissioner, community psychiatric nurse, counsellor, general practitioner, practice nurse/district nurse/health visitor, psychiatrist, social worker, carer, patient and voluntary organisations). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Face validity (median rating of 8 or 9 on a nine point scale with agreement by all panels) for assessing quality of care. RESULTS:A maximum of 334 indicators were rated by panels in the second round; 26% were rated valid by all panels. These indicators were categorised into 21 aspects of care, 11 relating to general practices and 10 relating to health authorities or primary care groups/trusts. There was variation in the total number of indicators rated valid across the different panels. Overall, GPs rated the lowest number of indicators as valid (41%, n=138) and carers rated the highest number valid (91%, n=304). CONCLUSIONS:The quality indicators represent consensus among key stakeholder groups in defining quality of care within primary care mental health services. These indicators could provide a guide for primary care organisations embarking on quality improvement initiatives in mental health care when addressing national targets and standards relating to primary care set out in the National Service Framework for Mental Health for England. Although many of the indicators relate to parochial issues in UK service delivery, the methodology used in the development of the indicators could be applied in other settings to produce locally relevant indicators.