Scholarlink

<p>This study investigated UK general dental practitioners’ habits and attitudes toward screening, risk assessment, and diagnosis of periodontal diseases and tooth wear in adult patients during routine examinations. Two primary recruiters, UK-based final year post-graduate students enrolled on the MSc in Aesthetic Dentistry at King’s College London distributed a piloted, paper-based, 14-statement questionnaire via secondary recruiters to UK general dentists. The latter participants were based at local dental practices or attending post-graduate courses. The secondary recruiters circulated and collected the questionnaire from the participants on the same day of distribution. Responses were supplied in an anonymised manner, and returned to the primary recruiters, either physically or by the scanning of the responses. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Chi-squared, and Fisher’s exact tests (Stata v12; significance at <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). Of 325 questionnaires distributed, 261 were satisfactorily completed, n = 261 (response rate: 80.3%). During an adult patient dental examination, high agreement was reported for periodontal risk assessment, probing, and diagnosis (≥ 88%). For the same appointment type, tooth wear risk assessments and clinical assessments were routinely performed by ≥ 81% of the sample, and 74% recorded tooth wear clinical diagnoses. While 98.5% used the Basic Periodontal Examination (BPE), only 29.8% regularly reported using a tooth wear index. The Basic Erosive Wear Examination (BEWE) was the most used (22.9%), but 4.3 times less frequently than the BPE. Satisfaction with undergraduate training with assessment and diagnosis was 2.9 times higher for periodontal assessment than for tooth wear. Significant differences were observed in the use of indices for periodontal disease versus tooth wear. The findings of this study support the need for clearer guidelines and a universally accepted tooth wear index in general practice, alongside improved satisfaction with UK undergraduate training in tooth wear assessment and diagnosis.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evaluating general practitioner attitudes towards screening, risk assessment, and diagnosis of periodontal diseases and tooth wear in the UK

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月14日

查看全文
  • Shamir B. Mehta,
  • Sabreen Bedi,
  • Mojgan Talibi,
  • Guissell Vallejo,
  • Subir Banerji

摘要

This study investigated UK general dental practitioners’ habits and attitudes toward screening, risk assessment, and diagnosis of periodontal diseases and tooth wear in adult patients during routine examinations. Two primary recruiters, UK-based final year post-graduate students enrolled on the MSc in Aesthetic Dentistry at King’s College London distributed a piloted, paper-based, 14-statement questionnaire via secondary recruiters to UK general dentists. The latter participants were based at local dental practices or attending post-graduate courses. The secondary recruiters circulated and collected the questionnaire from the participants on the same day of distribution. Responses were supplied in an anonymised manner, and returned to the primary recruiters, either physically or by the scanning of the responses. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Chi-squared, and Fisher’s exact tests (Stata v12; significance at p < 0.05). Of 325 questionnaires distributed, 261 were satisfactorily completed, n = 261 (response rate: 80.3%). During an adult patient dental examination, high agreement was reported for periodontal risk assessment, probing, and diagnosis (≥ 88%). For the same appointment type, tooth wear risk assessments and clinical assessments were routinely performed by ≥ 81% of the sample, and 74% recorded tooth wear clinical diagnoses. While 98.5% used the Basic Periodontal Examination (BPE), only 29.8% regularly reported using a tooth wear index. The Basic Erosive Wear Examination (BEWE) was the most used (22.9%), but 4.3 times less frequently than the BPE. Satisfaction with undergraduate training with assessment and diagnosis was 2.9 times higher for periodontal assessment than for tooth wear. Significant differences were observed in the use of indices for periodontal disease versus tooth wear. The findings of this study support the need for clearer guidelines and a universally accepted tooth wear index in general practice, alongside improved satisfaction with UK undergraduate training in tooth wear assessment and diagnosis.