While dental insurance and education appear to be the most important factors for determining both use of dental cleaning services and use of dental care in all three samples, acculturation also had some impact for determining use of dental care.
Background There is increased recognition that patients suffer adverse events (AEs) or harm caused by treatments in dentistry, and little is known about how dental providers describe these events. Understanding how providers view AEs is essential to building a safer environment in dental practice. Methods Dental providers and domain experts were interviewed through focus groups and in-depth interviews and asked to identify the types of AEs that may occur in dental settings. Results The first order listing of the interview and focus group findings yielded 1,514 items that included both causes and AEs. 632 causes were coded into one of the eight categories of the Eindhoven classification. 882 AEs were coded into 12 categories of a newly developed dental AE classification. Inter-rater reliability was moderate among coders. The list was reanalyzed and duplicate items were removed leaving a total of 747 unique AEs and 540 causes. The most frequently identified AE types were “Aspiration/ingestion” at 14% (n=142), “Wrong-site, wrong-procedure, wrong-patient errors” at 13%, “Hard tissue damage” at 13%, and “Soft tissue damage” at 12%. Conclusions Dental providers identified a large and diverse list of AEs. These events ranged from “death due to cardiac arrest” to “jaw fatigue from lengthy procedures”. Practical Implications Identifying threats to patient safety is a key element of improving dental patient safety. An inventory of dental AEs underpins efforts to track, prevent, and mitigate these events.
Objectives To determine the frequency and type of adverse events (AEs) associated with dental devices reported to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. Methods We downloaded and thoroughly reviewed the dental device-related AEs reported to MAUDE from January 01, 1996 – December 31, 2011. Results MAUDE received a total of 1,978,056 reports between January 01, 1996 and December 31, 2011. Among these reports, 28,046 (1.4 percent) AEs reports were associated with dental devices. Within the dental AE reports that had event type information, 17,261 reported injuries, 7,777 reported device malfunctions, and 66 reported deaths. Among the 66 entries classified as death reports, 52 actually reported a death in the description; the remaining were either misclassified or lacked sufficient information in the report to determine whether a death had occurred. 53.5 percent of the dental device associated AEs pertained to endosseous implants. Conclusion There is a plethora of devices used in dental care, and to achieve Element 1 of AHRQ’s Patient Safety Initiative, we must be able to monitor the safety of dental devices. While MAUDE is essentially the single source of this valuable information, our investigations led us to conclude that it currently has major limitations that prevent it from being the broad-based patient safety sentinel the profession requires. Practical Implications As potential contributors to MAUDE, dental care teams play a key role in improving the profession’s access to information about the safety of dental devices.
Purpose/Objectives This study examines the journey of U.S. dental schools’ predoctoral senior class of 2020, from the influences on and their motivations to pursue careers in dentistry, aspects of their dental school experiences, to plans upon graduation and the investment in their careers. Methods The study is an analysis of the results of the ADEA Survey of Dental School Seniors, 2020 Graduating Class. Each year, ADEA surveys senior predoctoral students from the accredited U.S. dental schools. Whenever feasible, the answers of the survey respondents from the 2020 class were compared with their 2015 counterparts. Results The analysis revealed that 46% of the 2020 respondents decided to become a dentist before going to undergraduate college, more than the proportion of those deciding while in college (42%). When it comes to preparedness to practice dentistry, the responses indicated a high level of readiness to go into the profession. Seventy‐seven percent of survey participants reported the COVID‐19 pandemic did not affect their plans after graduation. Between 2015 and 2020, the share of survey respondents who planned to go into advanced dental education immediately after graduation increased from 35% to 40%. Almost a third of the 2020 respondents who planned to go into private practice immediately upon graduation intended to join a Dental Service Organization (DSO). Grants and scholarships represented a higher share of the average funding for dental education for the 2020 respondents than five years ago. The share of respondents expecting to graduate without any loans to finance their dental degrees and predental education (educational debt) increased significantly, from 12% in 2015 to 17% in 2020. Conclusion(s) This research shows that during these uncertain times, U.S. dental schools continued their mission to train and graduate oral health professionals fully prepared to go into the profession.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.