The feasibility of data collection in dental practices, using codes for the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS), to allow European general dental practitioners to monitor dental caries at local, national, and international levels.

AIM: To determine whether or not European general dental practitioners can carry out comprehensive dental caries assessments of the teeth of selected quotas of their patients during routine dental check-ups, as an alternative or complement to the work of specialised, salaried, dental epidemiologists. METHODS: Dentists from several European countries were invited by local coordinators to be trained to carry out dental disease assessments. For caries, they used the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS), as part of a wider oral health indicators project with a European perspective. They attended training events and recruited and examined patients in their own practices before completing questionnaires, which they returned to a central data-processing facility. RESULTS: Ninety-six dentists returned questionnaires giving their opinions of the data-collection system after performing ICDAS assessments on 1216 patients. Mean times for assessments varied between countries from 7.8 to 14.06 minutes and were dependent on the age of the patient and the number and general condition of the teeth present. Given a choice of six difficulty/ease options for both understanding and applying the system, 89% of the dental examiners chose one of the two categories indicating the least difficulty for understanding and 73% chose one of these two categories for applying. CONCLUSION: Volunteer general dental practitioners (GDPs) from six European countries were able successfully to perform data collection for survey work in addition to their routine practice. If larger numbers of GDPs across Europe are prepared to undertake this type of work for selected quota samples, it should be possible to collect data to monitor caries levels among patients who attend dental practices at local, national, and international levels, provided that the time taken is considered and remunerated appropriately.

A randomised controlled trial to explore attitudes to routine scale and polish and compare manual versus ultrasonic scaling in the general dental service in Scotland [ISRCTN99609795].

BACKGROUND: To investigate, within general dental practice, patients' and vocational dental practitioners' (VDP) attitudes towards the benefits and costs of a simple scale and polish and to compare the experience of using manual versus ultrasonic instruments to scale teeth. METHODS: 28 VDPs and 420 patients participated. Patients were randomly allocated to either group. Patients' and VDPs' attitudes towards, and experience of, the scale and polish were elicited by means of self-administered questionnaires. RESULTS: The majority of patients (99%) believed a scale and polish was beneficial. VDPs considered ultrasonic treatment to be appropriate on significantly more occasions than they did for manual scale and polish (P < 0.001). Patient discomfort: with ultrasonic scaling 69.2% felt 'a little uncomfortable' or worse compared with 60% of those undergoing manual treatment (P = 0.072). VDPs considered treatment charges were appropriate for 77% of patients. CONCLUSION: Routine scaling and polishing is considered beneficial by both patients and vocational trainees. The majority of patients, regardless of treatment method, experience some degree of discomfort when undergoing a scale and polish. VDPs showed a preference for the ultrasonic treatment method.