Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Mac Giolla Phadraig C, Ahmad Fisal AB, Bird J, Kammer PV, Fleischmann I, Geddis-Regan A
    Spec Care Dentist, 2024;44(3):676-685.
    PMID: 38110713 DOI: 10.1111/scd.12949
    BACKGROUND: Dental behavior support (DBS) describes all techniques used by dental professionals to ensure that dental care is safe, effective, and acceptable. There is a need to standardize outcome measures across DBS techniques to reduce heterogeneity, limit selective reporting, promote consistency, and optimize outcomes across DBS research. A comprehensive review of existing measures is a prerequisite to understanding potential outcomes related to the area of interest.

    AIM: This review had three aims: first, to identify the outcome measures (OMs) reported in trials of dental behavior support; second, to categorize the component DBS techniques reported within interventions according to emerging agreed terminology; and, third, to map outcome measures to intervention type.

    METHODS: A scoping review of trials evaluating DBS techniques was undertaken from 2012 to 2022. The review was prospectively registered. Studies were identified through Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO. Study abstracts were screened by two reviewers. Data were extracted by single selector. Outcome measures were sorted according to measurement domains (physiological, behavioral, psychological, and treatment). Responses were assimilated and summed to produce a refined list of distinguishable outcome measures. Intervention types were categorized according to accepted descriptors. Frequencies were presented; associations between outcome domain and DBS type were also reported (Chi-square test of independence).

    RESULTS: A total of 344 trials were included in the review from an initial 14,793 titles / title and abstracts screened. Most involved children (n = 215), most were from India (n = 104), involving basic dental care (n = 117). The median number of outcome measures per trial was four (range = 1-12); 1,317 individual outcomes were reported, categorized as: psychological (n = 501, 38.0%); physiological (n = 491, 37.3%), behavioral (n = 123, 9.3%) or, treatment-related (n = 202, 15.3%). DBS interventions were split between 239 (45.7%) pharmacological and 283 (54.1%) non-pharmacological; 96.6% of interventions mapped to accepted descriptors. A significant relationship was noted between the type of intervention and the outcome domain reported.

    CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate massive variation in outcome measures of DBS interventions that likely lead to unnecessary heterogeneity, selective reporting, and questionable relevance in the literature. A large range of DBS interventions were mapped according to BeSiDe list. There is a need for consensus on a core outcome set across the spectrum of DBS techniques.

  2. Geddis-Regan A, Fisal ABA, Bird J, Fleischmann I, Mac Giolla Phadraig C
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 2024 Oct;52(5):660-676.
    PMID: 38680013 DOI: 10.1111/cdoe.12969
    BACKGROUND: Little is known about patients' or carers' reported experiences of dental care provided using dental behaviour support (DBS) techniques. Qualitative literature can provide unique insight into these experiences.

    AIM: To explore and synthesize qualitative literature related to patient experience of dental behaviour support.

    METHODS: A PROSPERO-registered systematic review of qualitative articles was undertaken. Studies were identified through MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. Abstracts were screened by two reviewers and data were extracted to summarize the qualitative findings included within them. A thematic summary approach was used to synthesize the qualitative data identified.

    RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included. Studies primarily explored experiences of dental care of children by speaking to their parents (n = 16), particularly regarding paediatric dental general anaesthesia (DGA) (n = 8). Studies of adults' experiences of DBS (n = 7) covered a range of techniques. Nine studies explored broader dental care experiences and did not study specific DBS approaches. A thematic synthesis identified five themes applicable across the studies identified: Trust and the therapeutic alliance supporting effective care delivery; considered information sharing often alleviated anticipatory anxiety; control and autonomy-reduced anxieties; variations in the perceived treatment successes and failures of DBS techniques; and DBS techniques produced longer positive and negative impacts on patients beyond direct care provision.

    CONCLUSION: Qualitative research has been under-utilized in research on DBS techniques. Care experiences of most DBS techniques outside of paediatric DGA are poorly understood. Building trust with patients and enabling autonomy appear to support positive patient-reported experiences of care.

  3. Mac Giolla Phadraig C, Kammer PV, Asimakopoulou K, Healy O, Fleischmann I, Buchanan H, et al.
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 2023 Dec;51(6):1065-1077.
    PMID: 37368479 DOI: 10.1111/cdoe.12890
    INTRODUCTION: There is no agreed taxonomy of the techniques used to support patients to receive professional oral healthcare. This lack of specification leads to imprecision in describing, understanding, teaching and implementing behaviour support techniques in dentistry (DBS).

    METHODS: This review aims to identify the labels and associated descriptors used by practitioners to describe DBS techniques, as a first step in developing a shared terminology for DBS techniques. Following registration of a protocol, a scoping review limited to Clinical Practice Guidelines only was undertaken to identify the labels and descriptors used to refer to DBS techniques.

    RESULTS: From 5317 screened records, 30 were included, generating a list of 51 distinct DBS techniques. General anaesthesia was the most commonly reported DBS (n = 21). This review also explores what term is given to DBS techniques as a group (Behaviour management was most commonly used (n = 8)) and how these techniques were categorized (mainly distinguishing between pharmacological and non-pharmacological).

    CONCLUSIONS: This is the first attempt to generate a list of techniques that can be selected for patients and marks an initial step in future efforts at agreeing and categorizing these techniques into an accepted taxonomy, with all the benefits this brings to research, education, practice and patients.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links