ABSTRACT
Situación Problematica - Problema cientifico - Objeto - Campo - Objetivo - Idea Cientifica sutentable - Tareas cientificas - Indigaciones Empíricas - Indigaciones teóricas(AU)
Subject(s)
Male , Female , Humans , Child , Preventive Dentistry , Preventive Dentistry/classification , Preventive Dentistry/instrumentation , Preventive Dentistry/methods , Preventive Dentistry/standardsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: While many studies have provided data on Americans' access to dental care, few have provided a detailed understanding of what specific treatments patients receive. This article provides detailed information about the types of dental services that Americans receive and the types of providers who render them. METHODS: The authors provide national estimates for the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population in several socioeconomic and demographic categories regarding dental visits, procedures performed and the types of providers who performed them, using household data from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, or MEPS. RESULTS: Data show that while the combination of diagnostic and preventive services adds up to 65 percent of all dental procedures, the combination of periodontal and endodontic procedures represents only 3 percent. Additionally, while 81 percent of all dental visits were reported as visits to general dentists, approximately 7 percent and 5 percent of respondents who had had a dental visit reported having visited orthodontists or oral surgeons, respectively. CONCLUSION: MEPS data show the magnitude and nature of dental visits in aggregate and for each of several demographic and socioeconomic categories. This information establishes a nationally representative baseline for the U.S. population in terms of rates of utilization, number and types of procedures and variations in types of providers performing the procedures. These nationally representative estimates include data elements that describe specific dental visits, dental procedures and type of provider, and they offer details that are useful, important and not found elsewhere. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: By understanding these analyses, U.S. dentists will be better positioned to provide care and better meet the dental care needs of all Americans.
Subject(s)
Dental Care/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Black or African American/statistics & numerical data , Age Factors , Aged , Dental Care/classification , Dental Health Services/classification , Dental Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Dental Prosthesis/classification , Dental Prosthesis/statistics & numerical data , Dental Restoration, Permanent/classification , Dental Restoration, Permanent/statistics & numerical data , Diagnosis, Oral/classification , Diagnosis, Oral/statistics & numerical data , Educational Status , Female , General Practice, Dental/classification , General Practice, Dental/statistics & numerical data , Health Expenditures/classification , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Needs and Demand/classification , Health Services Needs and Demand/statistics & numerical data , Hispanic or Latino/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Oral Surgical Procedures/classification , Oral Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Orthodontics/classification , Orthodontics/statistics & numerical data , Periodontics/classification , Periodontics/statistics & numerical data , Preventive Dentistry/classification , Preventive Dentistry/statistics & numerical data , Root Canal Therapy/classification , Root Canal Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Sex Factors , Social Class , Statistics as Topic , United States , White People/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
Visits were made to 26 selected general dental practices in Greater Manchester, UK to record the preventive technologies used on 106 patients below the age of 18 years. In addition, the patterns of treatment of 72 general dental practitioners in three contrasting areas in England were recorded, 11 of whom used preventive dental units. No relationship could be found between the organisation of the practice and the amount or type of prevention supplied or the patterns of treatment provided. The value of the preventive technologies currently offered in general dental practice is questioned and further research is recommended to discover the best model of practice to achieve cost-effective prevention.
Subject(s)
Technology, Dental , Tooth Diseases/prevention & control , Adolescent , Cariostatic Agents/administration & dosage , Cariostatic Agents/therapeutic use , Child , Child, Preschool , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Counseling , Diet , Dietary Sucrose/administration & dosage , England , Fluorides/administration & dosage , Fluorides/therapeutic use , Fluorides, Topical/administration & dosage , Fluorides, Topical/therapeutic use , General Practice, Dental/organization & administration , Humans , Oral Hygiene , Patient Education as Topic , Pit and Fissure Sealants/therapeutic use , Practice Patterns, Dentists'/classification , Practice Patterns, Dentists'/economics , Practice Patterns, Dentists'/organization & administration , Preventive Dentistry/classification , Preventive Dentistry/economics , Preventive Dentistry/organization & administration , Retrospective Studies , Technology, Dental/economics , United KingdomABSTRACT
Sri Lanka, being a developing country, cannot resort to high technology and sophisticated dentistry to achieve coverage for its whole population. The most cost effective means of controlling and preventing oral diseases has to be used and the primary health care approach with its basic philosophy of self-reliance and community participation will contribute substantially to the improvement of oral health of Sri Lankans. This paper outlines the decisions made in relation to preventive dentistry and the epidemiological data on which the goals were based.
