Access to dental care for children in the United States: a survey of general practitioners

BACKGROUND: In response to concern that inadequate dental school training may create a barrier to access to care for children, the authors conducted a survey concerning general practitioners' practice patterns involving child patients. METHODS: The authors requested a list of 4,970 randomly chosen general practitioners from the American Dental Association Survey Center. They then sent those dentists a written survey asking whether and in what numbers they treat children; the ages and caries levels of any children they do treat; their perceptions of their educational experiences in pediatric dentistry, and their perceived needs for continuing education in pediatric dentistry. They analyzed data using chi2. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of the general dentists surveyed treated children, but those younger than 4 years of age, with high levels of caries, and whose care is funded by Medicaid were represented in very low numbers. The types of patients treated and procedures performed by the respondents were significantly (P < or = .05) associated with the intensity of the respondents' educational experiences, except for the number and types of Medicaid patients they treated. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that the vast majority of general practitioners treat children in their practices, but there still are groups of children for whom access to dental care is a problem. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Very young children, children with high levels of caries and Medicaid-covered children have difficulty finding dental care in the general practice community.     

How willing are dentists to treat young children?: A survey of dentists affiliated with Medicaid managed care in New York City, 2010

BackgroundDespite recommendations for children to have a dental visit by the age of 1 year, access to dental care for young children, including children enrolled in Medicaid, remains limited. The authors conducted a survey to assess the availability of dentists to see young children enrolled in Medicaid managed care (MMC) in New York City (NYC), to determine barriers to the provision of dental care to young children and, within the context of MMC, to identify strategies to facilitate the delivery of dental care to children.MethodsThe authors mailed a survey to assess the provision of dental services to young children and perceived barriers and facilitators to 2,311 general dentists (GDs) and 140 pediatric dentists (PDs) affiliated with NYC MMC. A total of 1,127 surveys (46 percent) were received. The authors analyzed the responses according to provider type, youngest aged child seen, provider’s ability to see additional children and practice location. The authors compared responses by using the χ² test.ResultsFewer than one-half (47 percent) of GDs saw children aged 0 through 2 years. Provider type, years in practice and percentage of Medicaid-insured patients were associated significantly (P χ .005) with youngest age of child seen. Among respondents seeing children aged 0 through 2 years, PDs were significantly more likely to provide preventive therapy (P = .004) and restorative treatment (P χ .001). Additional training and access to consulting PDs were identified by GDs as potential facilitators to seeing young children.ConclusionA high proportion of NYC GDs affiliated with MMC do not see young children.Practice ImplicationsNinety-four percent of NYC MMC– affiliated dentists are GDs, but 53 percent of GD respondents did not see children aged 0 through 2 years in their practices. Improving access to dental care for young children requires changes in GDs’ practices, possibly by means of additional training and access to consulting PDs.     

Ohio dental care providers' treatment of young children, 2002

BACKGROUND: Adequate access to dental care for young children--particularly those from low-income families--is a public concern. The authors conducted a survey of Ohio dental care providers to examine factors influencing their willingness to care for these children. METHODS: Random samples of Ohio general practitioner (GPs) dentists and pediatric dentists (PDs) and all Ohio safety-net dental clinics completed a mail survey regarding treatment of children aged 0 through 5 years. The authors categorized responses by provider type and further analyzed GPs' responses by years since graduation and geographic character. RESULTS: Few Ohio GPs (8 percent) recommended a first dental visit by 1 year of age. While 91 percent of GPs treated children aged 3 through 5 years, only 34 percent treated children aged 0 through 2 years, most often for emergency visits or examinations. Only 7 percent of all GPs and 29 percent of PDs accepted patients enrolled in Medicaid without limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Children's being young (0-2 years of age) and having Medicaid as a payment source made GPs substantially less likely to treat them. Children's being enrolled in Head Start made GPs somewhat more likely to treat them. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: New strategies for ensuring dental care access for young children from low-income families are necessary. Such strategies may take the form of interpeer advocacy, education, practice incentives or creation of coordinated GP and PD teams.     

Rural versus urban analysis of dental procedures provided to Virginia Medicaid recipients

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report the distribution of procedures provided to Virginia Medicaid children by 3 types of dental providers in rural and urban areas. METHODS: Medicaid claims filed for dental patients less than 21 years old were obtained and analyzed for fiscal years 1994-1995. Dental providers were categorized according to their practice type: (1) general practice (GP); (2) pediatric (PD); and (3) public health (PH) dentists. Each type of practice was categorized as practicing in a metropolitan, urban, rural, or completely rural location and evaluated for percentages of preventive, diagnostic, and corrective services provided. RESULTS: Rural areas had a higher percentage of significant providers than did metropolitan or urban areas. General dentists performed more diagnostic and preventive but fewer corrective procedures than pediatric dentists. Pediatric dentists and general dentists in completely rural areas performed more corrective procedures than their counterparts in metropolitan or urban areas. CONCLUSIONS: General, pediatric, and public health dentists in metropolitan and urban areas perform slightly more diagnostic services and fewer corrective services than practitioners in more rural areas.     

Practices and opinions of pediatric and general dentists in Connecticut regarding the age 1 dental visit and dental care for children younger than 3 years old

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the percentage of general and pediatric dentists in Connecticut that were aware of, and practice, the current AAPD guidelines for the age one dental visit and to determine the services they provide to 0-2-yr-old patients. METHODS: A survey was mailed to Connecticut general and pediatric dentists seeking information on practice type, years in practice, training, ages of children seen, procedures performed and opinions regarding the age one dental visit. RESULTS: The response rate was 42% for general dentists and 84% for pediatric dentists, giving a sample of 113 and 60 dentists, respectively. All responding pediatric dentists reported seeing 0-2-yr-olds as compared to 42% of general dentists. Although not statistically significant, general dentists who were female or in practice less than 10 years were more likely to see 0-2-yr-olds. The majority of pediatric dentists reported performing all procedures surveyed, however, only just over half of general dentists provided topical fluoride or restorative care. Among pediatric dentists, 98% were aware of the AAPD guidelines and 92% agreed with them compared to 41% and 45% of general dentists respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all Connecticut pediatric dentists are caring for 0-2-yr-olds compared to 42% of Connecticut general dentists.     

Are general dentists' practice patterns and attitudes about treating Medicaid-enrolled preschool age children related to dental school training?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study were to investigate the willingness of general practitioners to provide dental care for preschool-aged children, and to explore the relationship between dental school experiences and practitioners' attitudes about treating Medicaid-enrolled children 3 years of age and younger. METHODS: A survey was mailed to 3,559 randomly selected general dentists in Texas. Respondents were asked to answer questions about their willingness to provide specified dental procedures for children of different ages, their dental school experiences with pediatric dentistry and whether these experiences were hands-on, lecture or no training, and their attitudes concerning treating Medicaid-enrolled children 3 years of age or younger. Associations between attitudes about treating Medicaid-enrolled children and dental school experiences were determined. RESULTS: The response rate was 26%. Almost all respondents were willing to provide routine procedures such as an examination (95%) and prophylaxis (94%) for children 5 years or younger. However, as children became younger and procedures more difficult, the number of general dentists willing to provide treatment decreased. The level of dental school training was significantly associated with the attitudes of general dentists about providing dental care for Medicaid-enrolled preschool-aged children (P < or = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Identification of factors associated with general dentists' willingness to see young children may improve access by increasing the number who will provide care for preschool-aged children.     

Increasing general dentists' provision of care to child patients through changes in the undergraduate pediatric dentistry program

Reduced caries rates and an increased percentage of children with dental insurance have made it more difficult for dental schools to provide undergraduates with sufficient numbers of pediatric dental patients requiring restorative procedures. This may result in graduates who are not competent and are reluctant to treat children after graduation. To ensure the quality of the undergraduate clinical training program, the Division of Pediatric Dentistry at the University of Manitoba changed from a comprehensive-based clinic to a block system in 1998-99. Specific communities with limited access to dental care (neighboring core area schools and Hutterite colonies) were specifically targeted as potential sources for child patients. This format increased the exposure of students to patient management as well as to complex pediatric dentistry procedures. To assess the learning experiences before and after the changes to the clinical pediatric dentistry program, sixty general dentists who had graduated from the University of Manitoba were randomly selected using the Manitoba Dental Association Directory. Surveys were sent to twenty general dentists who graduated in each of the following years: 1993, 2000, and 2002. Forty-five dentists responded, fifteen from each of the three surveyed classes. Dentists who graduated after the changes to the program (2000, 2002) reported that they performed a greater number of complex pediatric dentistry procedures and treated more toddler and preschool children than the group that graduated before the changes (1993). Referrals to pediatric dentistry specialists were higher in the 1993 group than in the 2000 and 2002 groups. In conclusion, an adequate pool of pediatric patients is critical to provide dental students with sufficient learning experiences. The dentists who graduated from the program after the changes were implemented are providing more comprehensive treatment to younger children.     

Periodontal Care and Treatment Provision by General Dentists in France

AimIn many countries, periodontal surgery is mainly provided by periodontists. This specialty is not recognised in France, where periodontal care and treatment are principally the responsibility of general dentists (GDs). The objective of this study was to investigate the periodontal care provided and factors associated with the treatment of periodontal diseases, including periodontal surgery, by GDs in France.MethodsA national cross-sectional survey of GDs practicing in the French metropolitan area was conducted in 2019. A self-administered questionnaire was sent by mail to the GDs selected by stratified simple random sampling. It included questions on respondents’ sociodemographic characteristics and their periodontal practice. A multivariate logistic regression model was employed to identify the factors associated with the practice of periodontal surgery by GDs.ResultsThree hundred eighty-five GDs responded (response rate, 23.4%). Their mean age was 45.2 years; 51.2% were male and 83.6% were in private practice. They reported performing selective periodontal examinations such as pocket probing on average for 34.2% of their patients, but only 5.5% of them performed them systematically. Several variables were significantly associated with the provision of periodontal surgical procedures such as the gender of the GDs, full mouth periodontal probing, implantology practice, insufficient fees, or uncertainty about treatment procedure. This survey confirmed the referral of patients for periodontal surgery by a minority of practitioners. It also highlighted insufficient screening and diagnostic procedures for periodontal diseases by GDs.ConclusionsThere is a need to improve French GDs’ periodontal skills and knowledge and to address other barriers that currently limit their ability to deliver comprehensive periodontal care.     

Sealants and dental caries: dentists' perspectives on evidence-based recommendations

BackgroundThe authors conducted a study to survey the perspectives of dentists regarding the 2010 American Dental Association (ADA) recommendation to seal non-cavitated carious lesions (NCCLs) in children and young adults.MethodsThe authors mailed a questionnaire to a randomly selected sample of 2,400 general dentists (GDs) and pediatric dentists (PDs) in the United States. The sample was chosen by the ADA&;apos;s Survey Center. The questionnaire included two photographs of NCCLs (permanent first molar and premolar) in a 12-year-old child. Respondents were provided with radiographic findings and asked to choose from several management options.ResultsIn the absence of radiographic evidence of caries, 37.4 percent and 42.3 percent of GDs and PDs, respectively, indicated that they would seal the NCCL in the molar. For the premolar, a significantly lower percentage of GDs than of PDs indicated that they would seal the NCCL. With radiographic evidence of caries in dentin, less than 4 percent of all dentists surveyed indicated that they would seal the NCCLs, and more than 90 percent indicated that they would remove the caries and place restorations. Less than 40 percent of dentists indicated that they sealed NCCLs in their practice.ConclusionsThe U.S. dentists surveyed have not adopted evidence-based clinical recommendations regarding the sealing of NCCLs.Practice ImplicationsNew educational and dissemination programs should be developed regarding these evidence-based caries management approaches.     

General dentists' referral of children younger than age 3 to pediatric dentists

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess which variables are associated with Iowa general dentists' referral of children younger than age 3 to pediatric dentists. METHODS: A survey was mailed to all Iowa general dentists (N=1,089). Respondents were asked how likely (never, sometimes, often, always) they were to refer children younger than age 3 to pediatric dentists in the past 12 months. Associations between referral patterns with practice, dentists,' and patients' characteristics were determined. RESULTS: The adjusted response rate was 65%. Nearly 50% of all dentists reported often or always referring children younger than age 3. Dentists who referred were more likely to be males and to have been in practice longer. Dentists who perceived that they had not received adequate exposure to preschool children younger than age 3 in dental school were more likely to refer. Dentists with smaller percentages of children within their practices were more likely to refer. Dentists most often referred children who were uncooperative, had severe decay, or had special needs. CONCLUSIONS: About one half of Iowa's general dentists refer children younger than age 3 to a pediatric dentist. Initiatives need to be undertaken to address dentists' reluctance to care for young children.     

Infant oral health care: a survey of general dentists, pediatric dentists, and pediatricians in Virginia

PURPOSE: This study's purpose was to examine the current knowledge, attitudes, and experiences related to infant oral health for dental and medical providers in Virginia. METHODS: A survey of infant oral health care was sent to: (a) 300 randomly selected general dentists; (b) 300 randomly selected pediatricians; and (c) all pediatric dentists in Virginia. Survey respondents were tabulated, and percent frequency distributions for responses to each item were computed. RESULTS: The surveys return rate was 48%. A total of 100% of pediatric dentists treated infants and were more likely to recommend that children be seen by age 1 (P < .001). All pediatricians treated infants as well, while only 5% referred for the first dental visit by 1 year of age. Forty-five percent of general dentists surveyed treated infants, and only 12% referred for the first dental visit by 1 year of age. The logistic regression results indicated that there were differences between practitioner type regarding the recommended age of the first dental visit and years in practice. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of pediatricians and general dentists are not advising patients to see the dentist by 1 year of age. There is a need for increased infant oral health care education in the medical and dental communities.     

A review of repeat general anesthesia for pediatric dental surgery in Alberta, Canada

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review data from the province of Alberta, Canada for First Nations children who required more than 1 general anesthesia (GA) procedure for dental surgery from 1996 to 2005. METHODS: This study was limited to First Nations and Inuit children younger than 18 years old in Alberta who received 2 or more GA procedures to facilitate dental treatment Data spanning 1996 to 2005 were provided from the Alberta Regional Office of First Nations & Inuit Health Branch, Health Canada. RESULTS: The entire database contained claims for 339 children who received repeat GA procedures for rehabilitative dental core. Seventy-six percent received 2 procedures, while the remainder underwent 3 or more surgeries. Twenty-four percent of First Nations children in this cohort were subjected to >2 GA procedures. Retreatment of previously restored teeth was a common observation. The majority of children were treated by general practitioners instead of pediatric dentists. Seventy-four percent who had 2 or more surgeries were treated by general dentists at the time of the first GA procedure. The mean age of children at the time of the first GA procedure was not associated with whether children received 2 or more GA procedures for dental care (P=.07). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that there may be on over-reliance on GA to treat dental caries for First Notions children in Alberta.     

Dentists' attitudes towards mouthguard protection.

PURPOSE: This study analyzed the attitudes of Virginia general dentists, orthodontists, and pediatric dentists towards mouthguard protection. METHODS: Questionnaires were constructed and mailed to 2500 dentists in Virginia. RESULTS: In this survey, 97% of orthodontists, 84% of pediatric dentists, and 67% of general dentists recommended mouthguard protection for their athletically active patients. The two main reasons for not recommending mouthguards were that the patient could obtain one from a less expensive source than the dental office and the dentist had not received formal training on fabrication or use of mouthguards. More recent graduates were more likely to have been taught mouthguard use and fabrication during their dental training. General dentists (59%) and pediatric dentists (56%) recommended the custom mouthguard while orthodontists recommended the prefabricated stock type (77%) as their primary choice of mouthguard. A majority of general dentists (58%), orthodontists (81%), and pediatric dentists (76%) recommended mouthguard protection for the contact sport of basketball which presently is a non-mandated mouthguard sport. CONCLUSION: Most dentists agree that athletically active patients require mouthguard protection. Many dentists, however, question whether they were the ones responsible for distributing and fabricating the mouthguards.     

U.S. predoctoral education in pediatric dentistry: its impact on access to dental care

This study sought to identify faculty, organization, patient pool, and procedures taught in predoctoral pediatric dentistry programs using a questionnaire sent to all fifty-five U.S. dental schools in 2001. Forty-eight (87 percent) programs reported an average of 3.9 full-time and 2.1 part-time FTE faculty, resulting in a mean faculty to student ratio of 1:6.4. One-third employ general dentists to teach pediatric dentistry, and 36 percent report fewer faculty than five years ago. Two-thirds were stand-alone departments. Over half (55 percent) reported increases in patient pools, but also a lack of patients with restorative needs. Half of the programs supplemented school-based pools with special populations, and two-thirds sent students on external rotations, most often to treat high-caries children. Those not using external rotations cited lack of faculty. Accepted patients averaged about four years, with only 6 percent of the pool under three years. Low-income or Medicaid-covered children accounted for 88 percent of school patient pools. Half of the schools felt the pool inadequate to meet competencies, attributable to lack of patients' restorative needs or inadequate intake numbers. Fewer than half of the programs (48 percent) provided hands-on experience with disabled patients, and one-third afforded every student with this experience. Pediatric dentistry was mentioned in fewer than half of the competency documents. Results suggest that U.S. pediatric dentistry predoctoral programs have faculty and patient pool limitations that affect competency achievement and adversely affect training and practice.     

General dentists and pediatric dental patients: the role of dental education

The objective of this study was to investigate whether undergraduate dental education affects general dentists' practice characteristics, attitudes, and professional behavior concerning the treatment of pediatric patients. Data were collected with a self-administered mailed survey from 241 general dentists who were members of the Michigan Dental Association (response rate=48.2 percent). While 40.4 percent of the respondents reported that their dental education had prepared them well to treat child patients, only 33.4 percent indicated that their clinical education had prepared them well. The level of educational preparedness was significantly correlated with a) practice characteristics such as how well the practice was set up to treat children and how knowledgeable and comfortable the staff was concerning providing care for children, b) attitudes concerning the treatment of child patients, and c) professional behavior such as the types of services provided for child patients versus the number of referrals made. The findings strongly suggest that educational experiences concerning the treatment of pediatric dental patients will shape future dental care providers' attitudes and professional behavior. Given the lack of access to dental care for children, it seems crucial to carefully evaluate undergraduate dental curricula to ensure that future dental care providers receive sufficient educational and especially clinical experiences concerning the treatment of child patients.     

Treating dental patients who use oral antithrombotic medication: a survey of dentists in the Netherlands

BackgroundFor many years, international guidelines have advised health care professionals not to adjust oral antithrombotic medication (OAM) regimens before invasive dental procedures. The authors conducted a study to examine the opinions of Dutch general dentists regarding the dental care of patients receiving treatment with these medications.MethodsThe authors invited via e-mail 1,442 general dentists in the Netherlands to answer a 20-item Internet-based questionnaire that they developed. Survey items consisted of questions about medical history taking, number of patients in the dental practice receiving OAM therapy, frequency of consulting with medical and dental colleagues and suggested dental treatment of patients during various invasive dental procedures.ResultsA total of 487 questionnaires were returned (response rate of 34 percent). The mean age of respondents was 47 years, and 77 percent were male. The majority of dentists responded that they obtain medical histories, but that they did not know how many of their patients were receiving OAM treatment. Dentists reported that they consult with medical colleagues frequently about antithrombotic medication. Ninety-one percent of respondents stated that they obtained their medical knowledge primarily in dental school. More than 50 percent of the dentists reported that they were not familiar with the international normalized ratio. The majority of dentists responded that they felt a need for clinical practice guidelines.ConclusionsAccording to the results of our survey, most dentists remain cautious when performing invasive dental procedures in patients who are treated with OAMs. Moreover, survey respondents tended to estimate that the risk of bleeding during dental procedures when OAM therapy is continued is higher than the risk of rethrombosis when use of antithrombotic medication is interrupted.Clinical ImplicationsA growing proportion of elderly patients and those with medically complex conditions are being treated in dental practices in the Netherlands. Consequently, more needs to be done to ensure that dentists are offered evidence-based guidance when treating patients who receive OAMs.     

Patients with special health care needs in general and pediatric dental practices in Ontario

The objective of this study was to determine the involvement of Ontario's general and pediatric dentists in providing care to patients with special health care needs (PSHCNs). A questionnaire was developed and sent to a randomly selected sample of general dentists and to all pediatric dentists in Ontario; response rates were 52% and 90%, respectively. Most general dentists and all pediatric dentists reported that they provided a full range of dental services to PSHCNs. Most (80%) general dentists treat PSHCNs of all ages, whereas 60% of pediatric dentists report only treating PSHCNs up to the age of 18 years. A majority of both groups report treating PSHCNs whose dental care is paid through various government-funded programs. Most general dentists received training in the treatment of PSHCNs in undergraduate dental school, and 40% reported taking continuing education courses in this area. Most pediatric dentists received this training during their advanced dental specialty training, and 29% reported taking continuing education courses in this area. The results of this survey appear to demonstrate that general and pediatric dentists in Ontario provide a full range of dental services to PSHCNs, treat patients with a variety of disabilities and of all ages and are interested in pursuing continuing education that focuses on the delivery of dental care to PSHCNs. However, the results may be inaccurate because of question design flaws and responder bias among the 52% of surveyed general dentists who returned their questionnaires.     

Treatability of children according to Dutch dentists

Most dentists find it important to treat the dentition of children; nevertheless cavities often remain untreated. In order to gain insight into the treatability of children, a survey was carried out involving 4,500 dentists of a health insurance company. A representative group answered questions about the necessity of treatment, and treatability of children and about the possibility of referring children to a colleague or a paediatric dentist. According to the questionnaire dentists find it important to treat the dentition of children. Most problems during dental treatment occur in the 0-6 years age group. Dentists are more likely to refer children in this age group to a colleague or pediatric dentist for treatment.     

The pediatric dental workforce in 2016 and beyond

BackgroundChildhood caries is a major oral and general health problem, particularly in certain populations. In this study, the authors aimed to evaluate the adequacy of the supply of pediatric dentists.MethodsThe authors collected baseline practice information from 2,546 pediatric dentists through an online survey (39.1% response rate) in 2017. The authors used a workforce simulation model by using data from the survey and other sources to produce estimates under several scenarios to anticipate future supply and demand for pediatric dentists.ResultsIf production of new pediatric dentists and use and delivery of oral health care continue at current rates, the pediatric dentist supply will increase by 4,030 full-time equivalent (FTE) dentists by 2030, whereas demand will increase by 140 FTE dentists by 2030. Supply growth was higher under hypothetical scenarios with an increased number of graduates (4,690 FTEs) and delayed retirement (4,320 FTEs). If children who are underserved experience greater access to care or if pediatric dentists provide a larger portion of services for children, demand could grow by 2,100 FTE dentists or by 10,470 FTE dentists, respectively.ConclusionsThe study results suggest that the supply of pediatric dentists is growing more rapidly than is the demand. Growth in demand could increase if pediatric dentists captured a larger share of pediatric dental services or if children who are underserved had oral health care use patterns similar to those of the population with fewer access barriers.Practical ImplicationsIt is important to encourage policy changes to reduce barriers to accessing oral health care, to continue pediatric dentists’ participation with Medicaid programs, and to urge early dental services for children.     

Evaluation of a dental society-based ABCD program in Washington state

BACKGROUND: The authors present a two-year evaluation of a dental society-managed dental care program in Washington state. A variation of the Access to Baby and Child Dentistry, or ABDC, program, the Mom & Me program was initiated to increase access to dental care for Medicaid-enrolled children younger than age 6 years in Yakima County. METHODS: This evaluation includes enrollment and visit data, first- and second-year cost data and results of a survey conducted with dental society members. RESULTS: The number of dentists treating Medicaid-enrolled children on a regular basis more than doubled, from 15 to 38 general dentists. In the first two years of the program, 4,705 children were enrolled and approximately 51 percent visited a dentist. CONCLUSIONS: The responses of dentists surveyed were positive, and the authors suggest that a dental society-managed program under the ABCD program -umbrella is a unique strategy for improving access to dental care for Medicaid clients. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: ABCD programs provide an avenue for dentists to treat children who otherwise would not receive care.