The reproducibility of the Denplan Oral Health Score (OHS) in general dental practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reproducibility of the Denplan Oral Health Score (OHS) and to examine whether general dental practitioners are more reproducible at measuring oral health when they use the OHS than when they use their usual method of examining patients. DESIGN: This was a single centre study designed to compare dentists' reproducibility using the Oral Health Score with their reproducibility when using the method of examination that they normally employ in general practice. SETTING: The study was carried out at The University of Birmingham School of Dentistry during 2001. PARTICIPANTS: Ten local general dental practitioners were recruited by advertising. The patients were selected from various clinics in the University of Birmingham School of Dentistry to provide a broad spectrum of oral health. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The dentists scored oral health by two methods; firstly on a 10 cm linear scale after using their everyday method of examination and secondly using the structured format of the OHS examination, where the Oral Health Scores were expressed as a percentage. RESULTS: Overall, the majority of the participating dentists demonstrated better intra-examiner reproducibility with the OHS than with their own method of examination. There was also higher inter-examiner reproducibility with the OHS than with the dentists' own method.

UK dentists' attitudes and behaviour towards Atraumatic Restorative Treatment for primary teeth.

BACKGROUND: Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) was introduced a decade ago as a minimal intervention treatment for caries in unindustrialised countries, but UK general dental practitioners (GDPs) may also be using this technique. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the materials and techniques used by a group of UK GDPs to treat caries in primary teeth. METHOD: A questionnaire, designed to determine GDPs' use of materials and techniques in the restoration of caries in primary teeth, was distributed to 600 GDPs in Scotland and England, with an explanatory letter and reply-paid envelope. The questionnaire included colour illustrations of two carious cavities in primary molar teeth and a request that respondents draw the cavity outline that they would use on the illustrations. The cavity outlines were assessed independently by two examiners. All other data were collated and analysed. RESULTS: 390 usable replies were received, a response rate of 65%. Of the respondents, 99% treated child patients and 42% of respondents were aware of ART. For treatment of a small Class II cavity, 37% drew a cavity outline without extension beyond removal of caries and a majority suggested use of an adhesive material (51% glass ionomer, 13% compomer). For cavity preparation, 47% of respondents used a drill, 10% an excavator and 41% used both. For treatment of a large occluso-lingual cavity, again most used an adhesive technique (44% glass ionomer, 12% compomer) for its restoration, while 50% used a drill, 7% an excavator and 42% used both for cavity preparation. CONCLUSION: Most respondents used adhesive materials for restoration of caries in primary molars, but, despite 42% of respondents stating that they were aware of the treatment, "true" ART was adopted by fewer than 10% of respondents.

Evaluation of an oral health scoring system by dentists in general dental practice.

UNLABELLED: An Oral Health Index (OHX) has been designed to provide a numerical measure of the overall state of a patient's oral health by means of a series of simple clinical examinations. This has been amended to produce the Oral Health Score (OHS). OBJECTIVE: To assess, by means of a questionnaire, the ease of use and understanding of the OHS by general dental practitioners. METHODS: 350 GDPs were asked to participate in the project, of whom 329 agreed. These dentists were given a lecture of 2 hours' duration on the OHS. The participating dentists were requested to use the OHS for a period of 1 year. At the end of this period, a questionnaire was delivered to them by post, with an explanatory letter and reply-paid envelope. RESULTS: Completed, usable questionnaires were received from 239 GDPs, a 77% response rate. Ninety three percent of respondents considered the OHS instructions to be satisfactory. The respondents' views on the criteria on which the OHS component assessments are based indicated that over 90% of respondents agreed with the criteria for caries, adequacy of restorations, periodontal assessment, mucosal assessment and assessment of dentures. A majority of respondents agreed that the OHS provided a valid representation of oral health. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study indicate that the OHS is considered to be an easy-to-use measure of a patient's oral health and that it provides a valid representation of a patient's oral health.

Glove wearing in Northern Ireland and an assessment of the loss of tactile perception.

The increased awareness of the need for cross-infection control in dentistry has led to recommendations that operating gloves be worn routinely by dental surgeons. A survey conducted amongst general dental practitioners in Northern Ireland showed a drop in glove wearing from 100% in the newly qualified to 47% in those who had qualified between 15 to 35 years ago. A frequently stated reason for the non wearing of gloves in this group is the diminution of tactile sense. To test this, a blind tutor was engaged to read a random standard length Braille passage whilst wearing selected gloves and the reading time recorded and compared with ungloved reading. The wearing of gloves increased reading time and, by implication, the loss of tactile perception, by between 14% and 37%, depending on the glove used. The thickness and stiffness of the gloves were also determined and the results suggest a relationship between these quantities and the loss of tactile perception.