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 dentists’ awareness and incorporation of the dental home concept

BackgroundThe authors measured the awareness of the dental home concept among pediatric dentists (PDs) and general practice dentists (GPs) in Ohio and determined whether they included dental home characteristics for children 5 years and younger into their practices.MethodsThe authors sent a pretested 20-question survey to all Ohio PDs and to a random sample of approximately 20 percent of GPs in Ohio. The authors designed the survey to elicit information about dental home awareness and the extent to which dental home characteristics were incorporated into dental practices.ResultsMore than 90 percent of both GPs and PDs incorporated or intended to incorporate into their dental practices the specific dental home characteristics mentioned in 20 of 41 items related to dental home characteristics. Of the respondents who did not already incorporate dental home characteristics into their practices, however, most did not intend to do so. Less than 50 percent of respondents in both groups responded positively to some items in the culturally effective group, and GPs were less likely than were PDs to provide a range of behavior management services and to provide treatment for patients with complex medical and dental treatment needs. PDs were more likely than were GPs to accept Ohio Medicaid (64 versus 33 percent). PDs were more likely than were GPs (78 versus 18 percent) to be familiar with the term “dental home.” More recent dental school graduates were more familiar with the term.ConclusionsMost Ohio PDs’ and GPs’ practices included characteristics found in the definition of dental home, despite a general lack of concept awareness on the part of GPs. Research is needed to provide an evidence base for the dental home.Practical ImplicationsOnce an evidence base is developed for the important aspects of the dental home and the definition is revised, efforts should be made to incorporate these aspects more broadly into dental practice.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Access to dental care in Alabama for children with special needs: parents' perspectives

BACKGROUND: Access to dental care and delivery of quality dental health services are important for children with special needs. The authors surveyed parents of children with special needs in Alabama to determine their perceptions of access and barriers to dental care for their children. METHODS: The authors sent a questionnaire to 2,057 parents of children aged 3 to 13 years with special needs--cleft lip and/or palate; cerebral palsy, or CP; spina bifida; or epilepsy/seizure disorders--who were listed in a database provided by Children Rehabilitation Services of Alabama. The authors conducted univariate and multivariate analyses to calculate odds ratios and 95 percent confidence intervals. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 38 percent (N = 714). Eighty-five percent of respondents reported that their children had received some form of routine dental care. However, 35 percent of respondents reported they had had problems finding dentists willing to treat their children. Among those with problems, significant barriers to dental care included their children's having Medicaid insurance, poor oral health or CP, as well as a shortage of dentists with training in the care of children with special needs. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: While the majority of respondents said their children had access to dental care, one-third said their children had problems receiving this care. Many of these problems can be ameliorated. Increasing providers' participation in the Medicaid program and improving their knowledge about, empathy for and training in the care of children with special needs is essential in improving access to dental care for this population.     

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.     

The dental safety net in Connecticut

BACKGROUND: Many poor, medically disabled and geographically isolated populations have difficulty accessing private-sector dental care and are considered underserved. To address this problem, public- and voluntary-sector organizations have established clinics and provide care to the underserved. Collectively, these clinics are known as "the dental safety net." The authors describe the dental safety net in Connecticut and examine the capacity and efficiency of this system to provide care to the noninstitutionalized underserved population of the state. METHODS: The authors describe Connecticut's dental safety net in terms of dentists, allied health staff members, operatories, patient visits and patients treated per dentist per year. The authors compare the productivity of safety-net dentists with that of private practitioners. They also estimate the capacity of the safety net to treat people enrolled in Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. RESULTS: The safety net is made up of dental clinics in community health centers, hospitals, the dental school and public schools. One hundred eleven dentists, 38 hygienists and 95 dental assistants staff the clinics. Safety-net dentists have fewer patient visits and patients than do private practitioners. The Connecticut safety-net system has the capacity to treat about 28.2 percent of publicly insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: The dental safety net is an important community resource, and greater use of allied dental personnel could substantially improve the capacity of the system to care for the poor and other underserved populations.     

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.     

The impact of a state children's health insurance program on access to dental care

BACKGROUND: Access to dental care for low-income children is limited. The authors examined the impact of a new state children's health insurance program, or SCHIP, in North Carolina on children's access to dental care. METHODS: Parents of 639 school-aged children responded to two surveys that asked about their child's access to dental services before enrollment and one year after enrollment in the new program. The authors used two-tailed McNemar tests to detect statistically significant changes within subjects. RESULTS: The percentage of school-aged children with a visit to a dentist in the previous year increased from 48 percent at baseline to 65 percent after one year in the program. Reported unmet dental need decreased from 43 percent at baseline to 18 percent after one year of enrollment. The proportion of children reported to have a usual source of dental care improved after enrollment in the program. CONCLUSION: The SCHIP model in North Carolina is an innovative program that has made a significant impact on access to dental care for school-aged children. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: SCHIP dental programs that resemble private insurance models and reimburse dentists at rates close to market rates hold the potential to address problems associated with dental access for low-income children.     

Characteristics of publicly insured children with high dental expenses

BACKGROUND: Dental coverage is provided for all children with Medicaid in Washington State. The goal of this study was to illuminate the characteristics of a sample of Medicaid-enrolled children with high dental expenses. METHODS: Dental care utilization data for a 33-month period were obtained from Washington State's Medicaid database. For children, 0 to 6 years, these data were linked with a parent survey addressing oral health behaviors, knowledge, family history of caries, snacking patterns, and access to dental care. Children with dental expenses of $1,000 or more were classified as the "high-expense" group. Risk factors for the high-expense group were evaluated using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: 345 children had at least one dental procedure including preventive and diagnostic care. Among these, 30 children (9 percent) incurred 64 percent of total dental expenses for the entire group. Parent perception of lack of dental coverage was associated with incurring high dental expenses. Children of Asian or Pacific Islander heritage were at disproportionately high risk compared to White children. Age of child and family history of caries were also associated with increased risk for high expenses. CONCLUSIONS: Not all low-income children on Medicaid are at high risk for caries. A combination of factors, including family history of caries and parent's perception of lack of dental insurance coverage, can potentially increase a child's likelihood for high-expense dental treatment. This study highlighted a small group of children with disproportionately high dental expenses. For some, earlier knowledge of coverage may have resulted in more timely access to preventive and diagnostic care, reducing the subsequent need for expensive restorative treatment.     

Impact of dental therapists on productivity and finances: I. Literature review

This study examined the financial impact of dental therapists on Federally Qualified Health Center dental clinics (treating children) and on private general dental practices (treating children and adults). This article, the first of four on this subject, reviews the dental therapy literature and the dental access problem for low-income children. Dental therapists now practice in many developed countries, tribal areas of Alaska, and Minnesota. These allied dental professionals vary in their training and required dentist supervision, but all provide routine restorative and other related services to children and adults. The limited literature on the impact of dental therapists suggests that they work mainly in school and community clinics and some private practices, are well accepted by patients, provide restorations that are comparable in quality to those of dentists, expand the supply of services, do not increase private practices' net revenues, and in school programs decrease the number of untreated decayed teeth. Of the approximately 33.8 million children enrolled in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), some 40 percent now receive at least one annual dental visit. To increase utilization for all children to 60 percent-the rate seen in children from upper-income families-another 6.7 million children need to receive care; dental therapists may help to accomplish that objective.     

Dental visits to hospital emergency departments by adults receiving Medicaid: assessing their use

BACKGROUND: Pain from toothaches represents a significant problem. People lacking access to private dental services may use hospital emergency departments, or EDs. In 1993, Maryland eliminated Medicaid reimbursement to dentists for adult emergency services. METHODS: The authors used the change in Medicaid policy that eliminated dentist reimbursement to establish two study periods. Data tapes describing patients' use of EDs were obtained from the Maryland Medicaid Management Information System. A total of 3,639 people visited EDs for dental problems sometime during the four-year study period. RESULTS: After controlling for age, race and sex, the authors found that the rate of ED claims was 12 percent higher in the postchange period than in the prechange period. Comparisons between periods show significant rate increases during the postchange period for men, whites, African-Americans and patients aged 21 through 44 years and 45 through 64 years. CONCLUSIONS: The change in Medicaid policy that eliminated dentist reimbursement and participation in the program appears to have increased the use of EDs for the treatment of dental problems. Practice Implications. Many EDs lack dental services and are not capable of providing definitive treatment. When definitive treatment is not provided, this pattern of care may be repeated if patients are forced to return for treatment.     

Survey of treatment provided for young children by West Virginia general dentists

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to survey the treatment provided by West Virginia general dentists (GDs) for young children. METHODS: A survey was mailed to 683 GDs in West Virginia. Respondents were questioned about their referrals to pediatric dentists, the youngest age for which they perform specific procedures, conscious sedation utilization, and whether they treat Medicaid-covered children. RESULTS: The response rate was 72%. Half of the GDs responded that they frequently referred children younger than 3 years old, and only one third reported performing dental examinations on a child 2 years old or younger. All responding GDs performed the surveyed procedures in 5-year-olds, but fewer respondents performed complex procedures for children < or = 2 years old. More than half of the GDs responded that they frequently had difficulty with referrals to a pediatric dentist due to distance/ transportation or not accepting new Medicaid patients. Medicaid-covered children were not treated by 25% of general dentists. CONCLUSIONS: Most GDs in West Virginia treat older children, but care is limited for children < or = 2 years old. Further studies are needed to uncover the specifics of these findings to improve the access and care for young West Virginia children.     

A comparison of dental services received by Medicaid and privately insured adult populations

BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared differences in dental care utilization rates between a publicly and a privately insured adult population in the same geographic area. The authors conducted this study to compare the demographic characteristics and use of dental services for enrollees in the Iowa Medicaid program and in the Delta Dental Plan of Iowa. The focus was on the overall use of dental services, with an emphasis on the use of tertiary care services such as endodontic therapy and tooth extraction services. METHODS: The authors used insurance claims data for adults aged 21 to 64 years who were enrolled in Delta Dental of Iowa and the Iowa Medicaid program for fiscal year 1998. They calculated utilization of dental services rates by type of dental procedure. RESULTS: In fiscal year 1998, 69.3 percent of Delta Dental enrollees and 27.2 percent of Medicaid enrollees had a dental visit. More than 90 percent of those in both populations with a dental visit had used preventive dental services during the year. Medicaid users were nearly twice as likely as Delta Dental enrollees to receive endodontic therapy (9.9 percent versus 5.0 percent, respectively) and nearly four times as likely to have had a tooth extracted (27.4 percent versus 7.1 percent, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Privately insured enrollees were more likely to use dental services that were Medicaid enrollees. The greater use of tertiary care services by the Medicaid population than by the privately insured population is indicative of a lower oral health status for this group at the time they sought care, even though it was a much younger group of adults. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The oral health status of low-income adults enrolled in Medicaid could benefit greatly from higher use of routine preventive dental services and earlier treatment of oral diseases to prevent the substantial need for preventable tertiary care services.     

Using a geographical information system to map the distribution of dentists in Ohio

BACKGROUND: Studies have reported that dental care is the highest unmet health care need in the United States and have evaluated this in terms of individual determinants of access and utilization. None of these studies took into consideration the provider issues of availability and accessibility or of spatial relations. The aim of this study was to analyze issues of provider availability and accessibility in Ohio using a geographical information system, or GIS. METHODS: Three Ohio databases were geocoded using GIS software. The databases included all 6,132 dentists licensed to practice in Ohio, 1,898 dentists who had billed the state Medicaid program in 1998 and safety-net clinics that provided free or low-cost care. Each practitioner was mapped at the county and ZIP code levels. RESULTS: Results are reported using maps at the county and ZIP code levels. The maps showed that 69.4 percent of dentists practiced in 12 metropolitan counties, 14 percent in 17 suburban counties and 16.6 percent in 59 rural counties (rural non-Appalachian counties plus Appalachian counties). In Appalachia, the dentist-to-population ratio was about one-half that of the metropolitan counties. CONCLUSION: Obvious disparities exist in the distribution of dentists in Ohio, particularly in rural and Appalachian counties. The need to increase the availability of dentists in these counties is evident. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: GIS is a useful tool for evaluating provider distribution and availability and planning programs to attract dentists to areas with small numbers of dentists.     

The dental care of U.S. children: access, use and referrals by nondentist providers, 2003

BACKGROUND: Improvements in oral health care services have not reached evenly across every segment of American society. The authors examine the role of nondentist practitioners in referring child patients for dental care by analyzing data from the 2003 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey conducted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Center for Health Statistics. METHODS: The authors provide national estimates of the percentage of the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States aged 2 through 17 years who had a dental visit, who had a dental checkup and who received advice from a nondentist health care provider to have a dental checkup. RESULTS: Overall, 38 percent of all poor, near-poor or low-income children and 60 percent of all middle- or high-income children aged 2 through 17 years reported having had a dental checkup during 2003. The authors observed no significant differences between poor, near-poor and low-income children and higher-income children in terms of having been advised by a nondentist health care provider to have a dental checkup. CONCLUSION: Although income may not predict the likelihood of patients' receiving advice from a nondentist health care provider to have a dental checkup, children from families with higher levels of income were more likely to seek dental care than were children from families with lower levels of income. Practice Implications. Efforts to increase access to dental care should aim to maximize the benefit of advice provided by nondentist health care practitioners to receive a dental checkup, so that children from families with limited income are as likely to receive a dental checkup as are children from families with higher levels of income.     

Improving access to oral health care in Florida

It is the position of the Florida Dental Association that every Floridian should understand that good oral health is important to overall health and well-being. Good oral health does not just happen; it is the result of both personal responsibility and professional care. The great majority of Floridians (more than 70 percent) receive high quality dental care. Unfortunately, that is not where the story of Florida's oral health ends. For the other approximate 30 percent of Floridians, the system is broken. Only 23.5 percent of Medicaid enrolled children and 11 percent of Medicaid adults receive any dental care annually. This White Paper explains the barriers to accessing dental care in Florida, what is currently being done to address the problem, and what solutions exist that, if implemented in totality, could improve the oral health of millions Floridians. Lack of access to care is the result of many factors, including patients' preceived need for care, lack of oral health literacy, geographic distribution of dentists and dental teams, financial support for care and transportation challenges to name a few. It is important that government, dental professionals, and advocates work together to identify and address the many barriers to access to care.