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.     

Use of dental services: an analysis of visits, procedures and providers, 1996

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.     

Assessing Patterns of Restorative and Preventive Care Among Children Enrolled in Medicaid,by Type of Dental Care Provider

BackgroundThe authors investigate the relationship of preventive dental treatment to subsequent receipt of comprehensive treatment among Medicaid-enrolled children.MethodsThe authors analyzed Medicaid dental claims data for 50,485 children residing in Wayne County, Mich. The study sample included children aged 5 through 12 years in 2002 who had been enrolled in Medicaid for at least one month and had had at least one dental visit each year from 2002 through 2005. The authors assessed dental care utilization and treatment patterns cross-sectionally for each year and longitudinally.ResultsAmong the Medicaid-enrolled children in 2002, 42 percent had had one or more dental visits during the year. At least 20 percent of the children with a dental visit in 2002 were treated by providers who billed Medicaid exclusively for diagnostic and preventive (DP) services. Children treated by DP care providers were less likely to receive restorative and/or surgical services than were children who were treated by dentists who provided a comprehensive mix of dental services. The logistic model showed that children who visited a DP-care provider were about 2.5 times less likely to receive restorative or surgical treatments than were children who visited comprehensive-care providers. Older children and African-American children were less likely to receive restorative and surgical treatments from both types of providers.ConclusionsThe study results show that the type of provider is a significant determinant of whether children received comprehensive restorative and surgical services. The results suggest that current policies that support preventive care–only programs may achieve increased access to preventive care for Medicaid-enrolled children in Wayne County, but they do not provide access to adequate comprehensive dental care.     

Service mix in general dental practices employing and not employing dental hygienists

Abstract Service mix studies conducted in Australia have indicated a low provision of periodontal services. The service mix in Australian general dental practices employing dental hygienists has not been studied. This study compares the service mix between 18 practices employing hygienists and 29 practices not employing hygienists in Adelaide. Practices employing hygienists tended to be larger group practices, with younger dentists seeing a younger set of patients. Practices employing dental hygienists provided a mean of 97.9 services to 57.2 patients over 2 days, significantly higher than the mean of 68.8 procedures to 39.1 patients in practices not employing dental hygienists. Comparing the % of procedures provided in treatment categories as a ratio of total procedures, practices employing dental hygienists provided significantly more periodontal procedures and less oral surgery, prosthetic and restorative procedures. Periodontally-related services accounted for an average of 37.7% of procedures in practices employing dental hygienists compared with 18.9% in practices not employing dental hygienists (p(0.05). Periodontal and preventive treatment of 50.7%) of patients in practices employing hygienists was delegated to a hygienist, and the level of delegation of periodontally-related procedures was 77.2%. Over 90% of procedures performed by hygienists were periodontally-related, with the removal of subgingival calculus accounting for 57.7% of all procedures provided by dental hygienists. In conclusion, practices employing hygienists had a more periodontally-orientated service mix, with hygienists acting to complement the services of dentists in the provision of periodontal services, rather than as a substitute for the dentist.     

Secular trends in dental services provided by dental therapists and dentists in Southwest Alaska

BackgroundThe goal of the study was to identify secular trends in dental service delivery between dental therapists and dentists in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta region of Southwest Alaska, the first area of the United States to authorize dental therapy practice.MethodsElectronic health record transactions from the Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation from 2006 through 2015 (n = 27,459) were analyzed. Five types of dental services were identified using Current Dental Terminology procedure codes: diagnostic, preventive, restorative, endodontic, and oral surgery. Main outcomes were percentages of services provided by dental therapists compared with dentists and population-level preventive oral health care.ResultsThe overall number of diagnostic, preventive, and restorative services in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta increased. For diagnostic services, there was a 3.5% annual decrease observed for dentists and a 4.1% annual increase for dental therapists (P < .001). Similar trends were observed for restorative services. For preventive services, there was no change for dentists (P = .89) and a 4.8% annual increase for dental therapists (P < .001). Dental therapists were more likely than dentists to provide preventive care at the population level.ConclusionsDental therapists have made substantial contributions to the delivery of dental services in Alaska Native communities, particularly for population-based preventive care.Practical ImplicationsThe study’s findings indicate that there is a role for dental therapy practice in addressing poor access to oral health care in underserved communities.     

Trends in use of dental care provider types and services in the United States in 2000-2016: Rural-urban comparisons

BackgroundThe authors conducted a study to assess recent trends in dental care provider mix (type of dental professionals visited) and service mix (types of dental procedures) use in the United States and to assess rural-urban disparities.MethodsData were from the 2000 through 2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. The sample was limited to respondents who reported at least 1 dental visit to a dental professional in the survey year (N = 138,734 adults ≥ 18 years). The authors estimated rates of visiting 3 dental professionals and undergoing 5 dental procedures and assessed the time trends by rural-urban residence and variation within rural areas. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the association between rural and urban residence and service and provider mix.ResultsA decreasing trend was observed in visiting a general dentist, and an increasing trend was observed in visiting a dental hygienist for both urban and rural residents (trend P values < .001). An increasing trend in having preventive procedures and a decreasing trend in having restorative and oral surgery procedures were observed only for urban residents (trend P values < .001). The combined data for 2000 through 2016 showed that rural residents were less likely to receive diagnostic services (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.93) and preventive services (AOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.96), and more likely to receive restorative (AOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.21) and oral surgery services (AOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.37).ConclusionsAlthough preventive dental services increased while surgical procedures decreased from 2000 through 2016 in the United States, significant oral health care disparities were found between rural and urban residents.Practical ImplicationsThese results of this study may help inform future initiatives to improve oral health in underserved communities. By understanding the types of providers visited and dental services received, US dentists will be better positioned to meet their patients’ oral health needs.     

Preventive Dentistry In Texas, Usa

This paper presents the results of a 1985 survey of 1000 Texas dentists regarding three major types of preventive measures--educational services, preventive procedures, and diagnostic services. The results show that among several given educational services, respondents tended most to instruct on correct brushing or flossing and tended least to counsel on diet. Among preventive procedures, most dentists removed plaque or calculus. A very small portion applied occlusal sealants on patients under the age of 15. As for diagnostic services, most performed oral cancer screening exams. Most performed dental X-rays, but many did not use leaded protection on their patients while taking X-rays. A large number did not check their patients' blood pressure. Income, attendance of continuing education programs, and number of dental hygienists were strong, positive predictors of provision of all three types of preventive measures. Dentists who practiced in more populous areas, or had practiced for fewer years, more likely provided patients with educational services and preventive procedures. Dentists delivered more preventive procedures if they attended more professional dental meetings. Dentists who worked more hours were more likely to provide educational services and preventive procedures. Patient load correlated negatively with dentists' delivery of preventive procedures.     

The role of dentist, practice and patient factors in the provision of dental services

OBJECTIVES: Service provision varies by dentist, practice and patient factors. However, limited subsets of these potential influences on service rates have been explored. More comprehensive models could improve our understanding of the factors influencing the pattern of care delivered. The aim of this study was to examine variation in dental services by dentist (treatment choice, practice beliefs, preferences for patients, demographics), practice (type, location, size and volume of practice) and patient (visit, demographic, oral health and socio-economic) characteristics. METHODS: A random sample of Australian dentists was surveyed in 1997-98 (response rate=60.3%). Private general practitioners (n=345) provided dentist and practice data, and service provision and patient variables were collected from a log of a typical clinical day (n=4,115 patients). Multivariate negative binomial regression models were fitted for diagnostic, preventive, restorative, extraction and prosthodontic services. RESULTS: Significant dentist factors included (P<0.05; RR=rate ratio): lower diagnostic rates (RR=0.78) for dentists with stronger practice beliefs for giving information about cost and treatment options; preventive rates were lower (RR=0.74) for male dentists and higher (RR=1.48) for younger dentists aged 20-29 years; restorative rates were higher (RR=1.27) for dentists that rated patient preferences more highly in treatment choice and in the dentist age group 30-39 years (RR=1.25); extraction rates were lower (RR=0.61) for dentists with stronger preferences for patients that would adhere with treatment but higher (RR=1.57) for dentists with stronger preferences for sociable patients; and prosthodontic rates were lower (RR=0.38) for dentists with stronger preferences for adaptable patients who were willing to cooperate when expected to do so. Practice factors included: higher preventive (RR=1.28) and prosthodontic rates (RR=2.07) in solo practice; higher preventive (RR=1.34) but lower prosthodontic rates (RR=0.42) in capital cities; lower diagnostic (RR=0.82) and extraction rates (RR=0.55) in practices with fewer other dentists; higher diagnostic (RR=1.33) and extraction (RR=1.62) rates but lower restorative rates (RR=0.84) in practices with lower patient visits per year. Patient factors included: lower preventive (RR=0.76) but higher extraction rates (RR=1.45) for emergency visits; lower extraction rates (RR=0.60) for the insured; higher diagnostic rates (RR=1.17) for new patients; higher restorative (RR=1.31) but lower prosthodontic rates (RR=0.46) for patients with decayed teeth; higher prosthodontic rates (RR=2.14) for those with dentures; and lower preventive (RR=0.66), but higher extraction (RR=2.22) and prosthodontic rates (RR=1.82) for patients from lower socio-economic status areas. CONCLUSIONS: Dental service rates were influenced by large number of small effects from a wide range of dentist, practice and patient factors. Socio-economic and geographic barriers may need broad policy innovations to be addressed, but factors such as insurance and visit type have the potential to be altered to achieve better service outcomes and there is scope for research into clinical outcomes to improve the knowledge upon which treatment decisions are based.     

Dental case management: increasing access to oral health care for families and children with low incomes

BACKGROUND: Medicaid beneficiaries have lower rates of dental visits and higher rates of dental disease compared with the rest of the population. Beneficiaries ascribe their low use of services to difficulties finding dentists who treat patients with Medicaid. Dentists cite low reimbursement rates, excessive paperwork, and patients' not keeping appointments and poor oral health literacy as reasons for not accepting patients with Medicaid. The authors pilot-tested the effectiveness of a dental case management program (DCMP) in increasing dentists' participation in Medicaid and Medicaid beneficiaries' use of services. METHODS: A dental case manager recruits dentists to participate in the Medicaid program, arranges training in billing procedures, resolves billing and payment problems, educates clients about the use of dental services and keeping appointments, links clients to dental offices, identifies potential barriers to care and helps clients obtain transportation to appointments. The authors evaluated the levels of participation of dentists in the DCMP in Medicaid and Medicaid beneficiaries' use of services. RESULTS: Dentists accepting new Medicaid patients increased from two to 28, with 145 dental visits a month provided to Medicaid beneficiaries. The percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries receiving dental services increased from 9 to 41 percent after the DCMP was implemented. CONCLUSIONS: The authors found that the DCMP was effective in increasing Medicaid beneficiaries' use of services, increasing dentists' participation in Medicaid, minimizing administrative burdens related to Medicaid participation, and increasing oral health literacy and treatment compliance among clients with low incomes.     

Trends in service provision among Australian private general dental practitioners over a 20-year period

AIM: To-investigate time trends in service provision. DESIGN: Five cross-sectional surveys across a 20-year period. SETTING: Australian private general practice PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of dentists. METHODS: Mailed questionnaires were collected in 1983, 1988, 1993, 1998 and 2003 (response rates 71%-76%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Services per visit, annual services per dentist; annual services per patient. RESULTS: Total services per visit increased over the study period from 1.78 to 2.37 (Poisson regression; P<0.05). However the annual number of services provided per dentist did not vary significantly, reflecting a trend among dentists to supply fewer patient visits per year. The annual number of services provided per patient increased from 3.47 to 5.50 (OLS regression; P<0.05), reflecting both increased service rates per visit and increased numbers of visits by patients. Dentists provided less restorative, prosthodontic and extraction services per year, but more diagnostic, preventive, endodontic and crown and bridge services. The annual care received per patient also included more diagnostic, preventive, endodontic and crown and bridge services but differed from the dentist pattern through increased rates of restorative services over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: The content of dentist workloads has changed to include less emphasis on removal and replacement of teeth and more effort on diagnosis and prevention aimed at retention of natural dentitions.     

Dentists' participation and children's use of services in the Indiana dental Medicaid program and SCHIP: assessing the impact of increased fees and administrative changes

BACKGROUND: The authors conducted a study to evaluate whether administrative changes, including higher fee schedules for dental services in the Indiana dental Medicaid program and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), were associated with improved dentist participation and utilization of dental services by children. METHODS: The authors evaluated dentists' participation and children's use of services for the two years before fees were increased to 100 percent of the 75th percentile of usual and customary fees, compared with two years after the increase. They obtained administrative data from the Indiana Department of Family and Social Services Administration and the Indiana Department of Public Health to determine participation rates and service use. RESULTS: The number of dentists seeing a Medicaid-enrolled child increased from 770 in fiscal year (FY) 1997 to 1,096 in FY 2000. The number of Medicaid-enrolled children with any dental visit increased from 68,717 (18 percent) to 147,878 (32 percent), with little difference between children enrolled through the Medicaid-SCHIP and traditional Medicaid programs by FY 2000. The mean number of visits per child per year and the mean number of procedures per child per year remained relatively constant. The cost per enrolled child increased from dollars 1.70 to dollars 6.70 per month, while the cost per child with a visit increased from dollars 9 to dollars 21 per month. CONCLUSION: The increase in fees and changes in administration of the Indiana dental Medicaid program were positively associated with improved dentist participation and children's use of dental services. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Changes beyond increasing fees to 100 percent of the 75th percentile may be needed if Medicaid-enrolled children are to have access to dental care commensurate with their lower oral health status and greater need for services. Sustained fee increases also are important. As of 2003, no increase in dental fees had occurred in the Indiana Medicaid program since the increase in FY 1998.     

Determinants of dental care visits among low-income African-American children

BACKGROUND: The objective of the authors' analysis was to investigate the determinants of dental care visits among young, low-income African-American children. METHODS: Trained researchers interviewed a representative sample of low-income black families (caregivers and children aged 0 through 5 years) in Detroit to assess their dental visit history, dental insurance status and oral health behaviors. Dental examinations were conducted using the International Caries Diagnosis Assessment System (ICDAS). Of the 1,021 families who completed an interview and examination, a subset of the 552 children aged 3 to 5 years (and their primary caregivers) was the focus of this analysis. RESULTS: Children with private dental insurance had four times higher odds of having visited a dentist compared with those who had no dental insurance, and the odds for children receiving Medicaid were about 1.5 times higher. A child's age and a caregiver's educational attainment were positive and significant determinants of child dental visits. Caregivers who visited a dentist for preventive reasons were five times more likely to have taken their children to visit the dentist. Visiting a dentist was associated with an increased mean number of filled or missing tooth surfaces, but it was not significantly associated with the mean number of untreated decayed teeth. CONCLUSION: Children's dental insurance status was a significant determinant of their having visited a dentist. Even after the authors accounted for insurance status and other risk indicators, they found that children of caregivers who reported visiting a dentist for preventive care had a higher number of dental care visits. Determinants of caregivers' preventive dental visits must be identified and encouraged to improve the percentage of low-income children who visit dentists.     

An analysis of dental visits in U.S. children, by category of service and sociodemographic factors, 1996.

PURPOSE: Data from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey were analyzed to determine the distribution of diagnostic and preventive, surgical, and other dental visit types received by U.S. children, aged 0-18 years. METHODS: Weighted point estimates and standard errors were generated using SUDAAN and stratified by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and poverty status. RESULTS: Overall, 39.3% of children had a diagnostic or preventive visit, 4.1% had a surgical visit, and 16.2% had a visit for a restorative/other service. Diagnostic and preventive services were most common, across age categories. For all types of service, utilization was higher among white and non-poor children, but there were no differences by gender. Age-specific associations were mixed, with diagnostic and preventive service and surgical service utilization having a different distribution than other service type. Poverty status was generally not associated with service-specific utilization among African-American children. CONCLUSIONS: There are profound disparities in the level of dental services obtained by children, especially among minority and poor youth. Findings suggest that Medicaid fails to assure comprehensive dental services for eligible children. Improvements in oral health care for minority and poor children are necessary if national health objectives for 2010 are to be met successfully.     

An analysis of preventive dental visits by provider type, 1996

BACKGROUND: Understanding preventive dental visit utilization patterns facilitates planning of the dental health services delivery system. The authors examine these patterns by analyzing the receipt of preventive dental services in the United States by type of dental provider. METHODS: The authors analyzed data from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) for the U.S. community-based population. They developed national estimates for the population with preventive dental visits by provider type, including the population with a preventive dental visit and mean number of preventive dental visits per person for socioeconomic and demographic categories. RESULTS: Respondents who are white, are older, are female, have dental insurance, are from higher income and education backgrounds, and reside in small metropolitan areas were more likely (P < .05) to receive preventive care from a dental hygienist than from a dentist. CONCLUSION: MEPS data showed that people's socioeconomic background and other demographic factors were associated with having a preventive dental visit with a dentist or dental hygienist. These factors also influence the per-person number of preventive visits by type of dental practitioner. These elements must be considered when planning for future dental work force needs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Estimating future dental work force needs through this analysis assists dentists in meeting patient demand and maximizing the productive output of all services rendered in their practices, including preventive services.     

Comparative analysis of dental procedure mix in public and private dental benefits programs

BackgroundThere is little published research on whether public and private dental benefits plans affect the types of oral health care procedures patients receive. This study compares the dental procedure mix by age group (children, working-age adults, older adults), dental benefits type (Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program, private), and level of Medicaid dental benefits by state (emergency only, limited, extensive).MethodsThe authors extracted public dental benefits claims data from the 2018 Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System. To compare procedure mix with beneficiaries who had private dental benefits, the authors used claims data from the 2018 IBM MarketScan dental database. The authors categorized dental procedures into specific service categories and calculated the share of procedures performed within each category. They analyzed procedure mix by age, plan type (fee-for-service, managed care), and adult Medicaid benefit level.ResultsAside from orthodontic services, the dental procedure mix among children with public and private benefits is similar. Among adults with public benefits, surgical interventions make up a higher share of dental procedures than routine preventive services.ConclusionsChildren with public benefits have a procedure mix comparable with those with private benefits. There are substantial differences in procedure mix between publicly and privately insured adults. Even in states that provide extensive dental benefits in Medicaid, those programs primarily finance invasive surgical treatment as opposed to preventive treatment.Practical ImplicationsThere is a need to assess best practices in publicly funded programs for children and translate those attributes to programs for adults for more equitable benefit design and care delivery across public and private insurers.     

The provision of orthodontic services by general dental practitioners. 1. Methods and descriptive results

Information regarding orthodontic service provision by general dental practitioners in Australia is limited. The aim of this survey was to determine the amount and variety of orthodontic services provided by general dental practitioners in the Melbourne Statistical Division, Victoria, Australia. A random sample of 307 dentists drawn from the Victorian Dentists Register was surveyed by mailed questionnaire: 218 (71%) replied. Data were collected using a fortnight log. During this time 59 per cent of the dentists saw at least one orthodontic patient; one dentist saw 66 orthodontic patients. Removable orthodontic appliances were used by 35 per cent of the dentists and fixed orthodontic appliances by 18 per cent. Twenty-six per cent provided comprehensive orthodontic treatment, 22 per cent aligned incisors, and 21 per cent corrected anterior cross-bites. The general dental practitioners surveyed provided a wide range of preventive and interceptive orthodontic services to generally a small percentage of their patients.     

A comparison of two mobile treatment programs for the homebound and nursing home patient

Two mobile treatment programs using portable equipment transported in vans to serve homebound persons in Denver and Chicago are compared for types of patients treated, use by local dentists, types of services provided, fees generated, and costs involved in operation during the 2-year period (1985–86). Both programs treated a similar, largely nursing home-based white female population that was predominantly older. Volunteer dentist participation varied greatly, with more than twice the number of dentists using the service in Chicago. Both programs accomplished essentially the same number of visits for the biennium studied, with 1,324 for Chicago and 1,320 for Denver. The Denver program was more efficient, generating more visits each time a dentist used the program. The services provided in total were about the same for both programs, with Denver generating 4,887 procedures and Chicago 4,602 for the biennium, but Denver had a more favorable ratio of diagnostic to treatment services. The costs of both programs were close, averaging about $60,000 per year. Denver was able to generate far more in equivalent fees than Chicago for the biennium, but Chicago dentists donated a greater percentage of services (67) than did Denver dentists (62).     

Role of the dental hygienist in the prosthodontic practice

Prosthodontic practices can benefit from the inclusion of a dental hygienist on the dental team. The dental hygienist can successfully complete procedures traditionally performed by the dentist. Delegation of these duties permits the dentist to spend time and energy on intricate procedures for which he or she has special expertise. The major modalities of responsibility that can be delegated include diagnostic data collection, educational and preventive services, and corrective therapy. It has been suggested that there is a need for expanding the duties of auxiliaries for prosthodontics in the future. It is our recommendation to use effectively the important auxiliary, the dental hygienist, in prosthodontic practice. For prosthodontic patients, the importance of the dental hygienist can be supported from two perspectives. First, the dental hygienist is formally educated in the oral and basic sciences and is qualified to perform intraoral procedures. Second, the dental hygienist is able to educate patients in regard to diet and oral hygiene habits. The dental hygienist's role in the prosthodontic practice has a potential that must not be overlooked. This opportunity, when provided, can be challenging, successful, and beneficial to the dentist, the patient, and the practice of prosthodontics.     

Prevention of early childhood caries in North Carolina medical practices: implications for research and practice

Early childhood caries is a significant public health problem in low-income children, with important negative consequences for the child and the family. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development, implementation, and preliminary outcomes of preventive dentistry programs in North Carolina that target low-income children from birth to thirty-five months of age. The focus is on Into the Mouths of Babes, a statewide program in which pediatricians, family physicians, and providers in community health clinics are reimbursed by Medicaid to provide preventive dental services for children (risk assessment, screening, referral, fluoride varnish application) and caregivers (counseling). The provider intervention includes continuing medical education lectures and interactive sessions, practice guidelines for the patient interventions, case-based problems, practical strategies for implementation, a toolkit with resource materials, and follow-up training. In the first two years of the statewide program, 1,595 medical providers have been trained. The number of providers billing for these services has steadily increased, and by the last quarter of 2002, the number of visits in which preventive dental services were provided in medical offices reached 10,875. A total of 38,056 preventive dental visits occurred in medical offices in 2002. By the end of 2002, only sixteen of the state's one hundred counties had no pediatrician, family physician, or local health department participating. The preliminary results from this program demonstrate that nondental professionals can integrate preventive dental services into their practices. The program has increased access to preventive dental services for young Medicaid children whose access to dentists is restricted. Assessments of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of both the provider and patient interventions are under way.