E O Beltrán, J T Newton, V Avila, N B Pitts, J E Castellanos, L M A Tenuta, S Martignon
{"title":"Dentists' Perceptions of Personal Infection Control Measurements in Response to COVID-19.","authors":"E O Beltrán, J T Newton, V Avila, N B Pitts, J E Castellanos, L M A Tenuta, S Martignon","doi":"10.1177/23800844221123751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore through focus groups (FGs) the perceptions of dental practitioners (DPs) from different countries of the challenges of implementing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related biosafety measures, especially personal protection equipment (PPE), during the COVID-19 pandemic period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>DPs from Colombia, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States were invited to participate in country-based FGs. These were facilitated by an experienced moderator who explored the factors that guided the implementation of COVID-19 related biosafety measures and PPE use. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis on the basis of categories defined by the researchers deductively and inductively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25 DPs participated in 3 FGs (Colombia:<i>n</i> = 8; United Kingdom: <i>n</i> = 7; United States: <i>n</i> = 9) and 1 in an in-depth interview (Germany). DPs described using several processes to judge which guidance document to adopt and which aspects of the guidance were important in their practice. These included making judgments concerning the views of any indemnity organization to which the DPs were responsible, the staff's views in the practice, and the views of patients. In the absence of a single overarching guidance document, DPs filtered the available information through several considerations to find a level of PPE that they deemed \"implementable\" in local practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings suggest that the implementation of evidence-based practice is subject to modification through a lens of what is \"feasible\" in practice.</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>Clinicians, educators, and policy makers can use the results of this study to understand the process through which guidance is transformed into implementable patient care pathways in the dental practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":14783,"journal":{"name":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","volume":" ","pages":"21-26"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9548485/pdf/10.1177_23800844221123751.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844221123751","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To explore through focus groups (FGs) the perceptions of dental practitioners (DPs) from different countries of the challenges of implementing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related biosafety measures, especially personal protection equipment (PPE), during the COVID-19 pandemic period.
Methods: DPs from Colombia, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States were invited to participate in country-based FGs. These were facilitated by an experienced moderator who explored the factors that guided the implementation of COVID-19 related biosafety measures and PPE use. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis on the basis of categories defined by the researchers deductively and inductively.
Results: A total of 25 DPs participated in 3 FGs (Colombia:n = 8; United Kingdom: n = 7; United States: n = 9) and 1 in an in-depth interview (Germany). DPs described using several processes to judge which guidance document to adopt and which aspects of the guidance were important in their practice. These included making judgments concerning the views of any indemnity organization to which the DPs were responsible, the staff's views in the practice, and the views of patients. In the absence of a single overarching guidance document, DPs filtered the available information through several considerations to find a level of PPE that they deemed "implementable" in local practice.
Conclusions: The findings suggest that the implementation of evidence-based practice is subject to modification through a lens of what is "feasible" in practice.
Knowledge transfer statement: Clinicians, educators, and policy makers can use the results of this study to understand the process through which guidance is transformed into implementable patient care pathways in the dental practice.
期刊介绍:
JDR Clinical & Translational Research seeks to publish the highest quality research articles on clinical and translational research including all of the dental specialties and implantology. Examples include behavioral sciences, cariology, oral & pharyngeal cancer, disease diagnostics, evidence based health care delivery, human genetics, health services research, periodontal diseases, oral medicine, radiology, and pathology. The JDR Clinical & Translational Research expands on its research content by including high-impact health care and global oral health policy statements and systematic reviews of clinical concepts affecting clinical practice. Unique to the JDR Clinical & Translational Research are advances in clinical and translational medicine articles created to focus on research with an immediate potential to affect clinical therapy outcomes.