METHODS: A random convenient sampling methodology was employed for sample selection. A pre-tested 11-item questionnaire was validated on the dental officers. The survey was distributed to 182 GDPs attending the annual Malaysian Dental Association conference in January 2010. The data obtained was statistically analyzed using descriptive analysis and logistic regression was employed to predict the probability of achieving high scores.
RESULTS: A total of 182 general dental practitioners participated in the study, with the majority being female (n=153, 75%). The place of practice significantly affected the knowledge score. In the group that scored more than 80 points (n=84, 46%), 76% of them worked with government hospitals. Age, work duration and number of traumatised teeth previously treated had no significant effect. The odds ratio for place of practice indicates that respondents who work in government hospitals are 3.6 times more likely to score more than 80 points compared to those who worked in private clinics (OR=3.615, P=0.001).
CONCLUSION: The knowledge level on the management of avulsed tooth among general dental practitioners in Malaysia needs to be improved. Strategies in improvement of the Malaysian dental educational system, continuous dental educational activities and utilisation of guidelines on trauma management should be recommended to increase the knowledge level of avulsed tooth management to ensure good treatment outcomes.
CLINICAL IMPLICATION: Trauma prevention and further education regarding the management of avulsed tooth is an essential requirement to improve general dental practitioners knowledge and clinical skills.
METHODS: Dentists were recruited through two main dental associations in Malaysia and attended a 1-day training session on recognizing abnormalities within the oral cavity. Following the training, the dentists conducted screening and provided risk habits cessation advice at their respective clinics for 6 months. The impact of the program was evaluated by determining the number of patients who were screened and/or provided with risk habits cessation advice.
RESULTS: Twenty-six dentists took part in the program and conducted opportunistic screening on a total of 2603 individuals. On average, they screened about 23.0% of their patients and 5.1% were given risk habits cessation advice. Notably, dentists who had lower patient load were more likely to conduct opportunistic screening.
CONCLUSIONS: While the participating private dentists state that they have a role in performing opportunistic screening and providing risk habits cessation advice, these activities are still not a priority area in the private clinics, strongly suggesting that strategies to motivate dentists in this setting are urgently needed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey on dentists' knowledge and their practices in prevention and early detection of oral cancer was conducted using a 26-item self-administered questionnaire.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: A response rate of 41.7% was achieved. The level of knowledge on early signs and risk habits associated with oral cancer was high and the majority reported to have conducted opportunistic screening and advised patients on risk habit cessation. Factors that influenced the dentist in practising prevention and early detection of oral cancer were continuous education on oral cancer, age, nature of practice and recent graduation. Notably, dentists were receptive to further training in the area of oral cancer detection and cessation of risk habits. Taken together, the study demonstrated that the dental clinic is a good avenue to conduct programs on opportunistic screening, and continuous education in these areas is necessary to adequately equip dentists in running these programs. Further, this study also highlighted knowledge deficits and practice shortcomings which will help in planning and developing programs that further encourage better participation of dentists in prevention and early detection of oral cancer.