A Review of the Ethics of Patient-Based Licensure Examinations.

R Lamont MacNeil, Kathleen E Murphy
{"title":"A Review of the Ethics of Patient-Based Licensure Examinations.","authors":"R Lamont MacNeil, Kathleen E Murphy","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose</b> Concerns regarding the ethical justification for the use of single-encounter, procedure-based examinations on live patients for the licensure of dental hygienists and dentists in the United States persists despite decades of debate and publication on the subject. The purpose of this literature review was to summarize the specific ethical concerns and quantify recommendations in favor or against this examination methodology.<b>Methods</b> A population, intervention, control or comparison, outcome (PICO) question was developed to review the topic as follows: \"For individuals receiving dental care as part of determination of candidates for competency and readiness for licensure, do patient-based licensure examinations, as compared to other assessment methods, violate or infringe upon ethical principles or ethical standards for health care or society?\" An electronic search was performed in three databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Embase. Key search terms and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) included the following: ethics, clinical, competence, dental, dental hygiene, dentistry, education, licensure, live patient, and practice.<b>Results</b> Ethical concerns about the use of patient examinations have been published in the professional literature for over 35 years. Of the 29 selected or endpoint articles identified, 27 articles cited one or more ethical concerns relating to single-encounter patient-based examinations while 20 articles recommended the elimination of this type of examination with an additional 6 articles citing elimination as an option in resolving the ethical issues regarding this type of licensure examination.<b>Conclusion</b> The literature holds a predominant, prevailing professional opinion that single-encounter, procedure-based examinations on live patients presents significant ethical concerns and should be eliminated as a method in initial dental hygiene and dental licensure. The literature also suggests that state dental boards should initiate corrective regulatory or legislative actions to expeditiously end recognition of live patient examinations in their licensure processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":52471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dental hygiene : JDH / American Dental Hygienists'' Association","volume":"98 4","pages":"37-49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dental hygiene : JDH / American Dental Hygienists'' Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose Concerns regarding the ethical justification for the use of single-encounter, procedure-based examinations on live patients for the licensure of dental hygienists and dentists in the United States persists despite decades of debate and publication on the subject. The purpose of this literature review was to summarize the specific ethical concerns and quantify recommendations in favor or against this examination methodology.Methods A population, intervention, control or comparison, outcome (PICO) question was developed to review the topic as follows: "For individuals receiving dental care as part of determination of candidates for competency and readiness for licensure, do patient-based licensure examinations, as compared to other assessment methods, violate or infringe upon ethical principles or ethical standards for health care or society?" An electronic search was performed in three databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Embase. Key search terms and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) included the following: ethics, clinical, competence, dental, dental hygiene, dentistry, education, licensure, live patient, and practice.Results Ethical concerns about the use of patient examinations have been published in the professional literature for over 35 years. Of the 29 selected or endpoint articles identified, 27 articles cited one or more ethical concerns relating to single-encounter patient-based examinations while 20 articles recommended the elimination of this type of examination with an additional 6 articles citing elimination as an option in resolving the ethical issues regarding this type of licensure examination.Conclusion The literature holds a predominant, prevailing professional opinion that single-encounter, procedure-based examinations on live patients presents significant ethical concerns and should be eliminated as a method in initial dental hygiene and dental licensure. The literature also suggests that state dental boards should initiate corrective regulatory or legislative actions to expeditiously end recognition of live patient examinations in their licensure processes.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于患者的执业资格考试伦理回顾。
目的 在美国,对牙科卫生员和牙医执照考试中使用单次、基于程序的现场患者考试的伦理理由的担忧一直存在,尽管就这一问题进行了数十年的辩论并发表了相关文章。本文献综述的目的是总结具体的伦理问题,并量化支持或反对这种检查方法的建议。方法 我们提出了一个 "人群、干预、对照或比较、结果"(PICO)问题,对该主题进行了如下综述:"对于接受牙科治疗的个人而言,作为确定候选人能力和是否准备好取得执照的一部分,与其他评估方法相比,基于患者的执照考试是否违反或侵犯了医疗保健或社会的伦理原则或伦理标准?在三个数据库中进行了电子检索:PubMed/Medline、Scopus 和 Embase。关键搜索词和医学主题词表(MeSH)包括:伦理、临床、能力、牙科、牙科卫生、牙科、教育、执照、活体患者和实践。在29篇被选中或被确定为终点的文章中,有27篇文章提到了一种或多种与单人面对面病人考试有关的伦理问题,有20篇文章建议取消这种考试,另有6篇文章提到取消这种考试是解决这种执照考试伦理问题的一种选择。文献还建议各州的牙科委员会应启动纠正性的监管或立法行动,以尽快结束在其执照颁发过程中对现场患者考试的认可。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: The Journal of Dental Hygiene is the refereed, scientific publication of the American Dental Hygienists’ Association. It promotes the publication of original research related to the practice and education of dental hygiene. It supports the development and dissemination of a dental hygiene body of knowledge through scientific inquiry in basic, applied, and clinical research.
期刊最新文献
Advances and Challenges in Pediatric Oral Health. DIY Orthodontic Relapse Correction Gone Wrong: A case study. Fluoride in 2025. The Role of Reporting Guidelines in Research Publication. Improving Dental Hygiene Students' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Confidence Toward Prenatal Oral Health Through Experiential Learning: A pilot study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1