1. Summarise the intent, methods and outcomes of the article.
The intention of this article was to measure the outcome of recommended treatment for a child with differing severities of caries by paediatric and general dental practitioners in England. This was carried out through surveying measures, which contained four hypothetical clinical case scenarios focused on dental caries in a single primary molar to measure the care provided. The survey results indicated a variety of responses among both paediatric dentists and general dental practitioners, which was particularly exaggerated for more severe carious lesions compared with less severe lesions. The difference in opinion was based on techniques used implemented as well as philosophy of care.
2. Why do you think the authors adopt the views and opinions they did?
The authors remain objective throughout the article and are clearly concerned with the implications of the outcome of the study. They have emphasised the need for further research to be undertaken as they state not have commented on which treatment option was considered the best possible per scenario due to lack of strong evidence.
3. How could the opinions and outcomes in this article affect your practice as an oral health graduate?
The findings of this study report highlight the variety of different treatment options implemented by dental practitioners. This emphasises the patient centred care approach that as dental practitioners would account for certain variation in treatment provided. This would greatly impact my practice as an oral health graduate as through our teachings at university and clinical experience with SADS there are already variations in the care provided based on factors outside our control such as funding, as well as determining the most realistic, cost-effective, dental care for each particular patient and their needs. This is especially important to consider due to the implications of the child’s experience, some treatments may be avoided to prevent precipitating dental anxieties in the child.
Lana's comments - uploaded by Cathy
ReplyDelete1. Summarise the intent, methods and outcomes of the article.
The intention of this article was to measure the outcome of recommended treatment for a child with differing severities of caries by paediatric and general dental practitioners in England. This was carried out through surveying measures, which contained four hypothetical clinical case scenarios focused on dental caries in a single primary molar to measure the care provided. The survey results indicated a variety of responses among both paediatric dentists and general dental practitioners, which was particularly exaggerated for more severe carious lesions compared with less severe lesions. The difference in opinion was based on techniques used implemented as well as philosophy of care.
2. Why do you think the authors adopt the views and opinions they did?
The authors remain objective throughout the article and are clearly concerned with the implications of the outcome of the study. They have emphasised the need for further research to be undertaken as they state not have commented on which treatment option was considered the best possible per scenario due to lack of strong evidence.
3. How could the opinions and outcomes in this article affect your practice as an oral health graduate?
The findings of this study report highlight the variety of different treatment options implemented by dental practitioners. This emphasises the patient centred care approach that as dental practitioners would account for certain variation in treatment provided. This would greatly impact my practice as an oral health graduate as through our teachings at university and clinical experience with SADS there are already variations in the care provided based on factors outside our control such as funding, as well as determining the most realistic, cost-effective, dental care for each particular patient and their needs. This is especially important to consider due to the implications of the child’s experience, some treatments may be avoided to prevent precipitating dental anxieties in the child.