An audit of dental general anaesthetic referral from a general dental practice in South Wales.

Wayne Richards, Kamran Razzaq, Gary Higgs
{"title":"An audit of dental general anaesthetic referral from a general dental practice in South Wales.","authors":"Wayne Richards,&nbsp;Kamran Razzaq,&nbsp;Gary Higgs","doi":"10.1308/135576109789389441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this audit was to quantify the number of patients that received a dental general anaesthetic (DGA) between 1999 and 2007 following referral from a general dental practice. It also aimed to establish the deprivation status of those referred and to investigate further dental treatment pathways of these patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were collected from all patient records held by the practice. The information collected included: postcode, gender, age at the close of the study, age at time of DGA, reason for DGA, number of teeth extracted, and details of further ongoing care. In the absence of individual level socioeconomic data, a deprivation score (derived from the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation [WIMD]) was appended to each record in order to provide a measure of deprivation based on the postcode of the patient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and eighty-seven patients were referred for DGA during the nine-year period. Their mean age was 9.4 years (95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.4, 10.4) and 30.7% were children aged five years or younger. The most common reason for DGA was dental caries. The mean number of teeth extracted was 4.5 (95% CI = 4.1, 4.9). Patients living in deprived areas were more likely to be referred for DGA. Of the 87 who did not subsequently attend for continuing care, 72 were from deprived areas compared with 15 from more affluent areas (P=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In proportion to the number of patients registered at a practice, the number of referrals for DGAs was relatively low. Patients categorised as deprived (based on their residential postcode) received more referrals for DGAs than those from more affluent areas. Patients from deprived locations were significantly more likely not to attend for continuing care after their DGA than those from more affluent areas.</p>","PeriodicalId":79454,"journal":{"name":"Primary dental care : journal of the Faculty of General Dental Practitioners (UK)","volume":"16 4","pages":"143-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1308/135576109789389441","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary dental care : journal of the Faculty of General Dental Practitioners (UK)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1308/135576109789389441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this audit was to quantify the number of patients that received a dental general anaesthetic (DGA) between 1999 and 2007 following referral from a general dental practice. It also aimed to establish the deprivation status of those referred and to investigate further dental treatment pathways of these patients.

Methods: Data were collected from all patient records held by the practice. The information collected included: postcode, gender, age at the close of the study, age at time of DGA, reason for DGA, number of teeth extracted, and details of further ongoing care. In the absence of individual level socioeconomic data, a deprivation score (derived from the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation [WIMD]) was appended to each record in order to provide a measure of deprivation based on the postcode of the patient.

Results: Two hundred and eighty-seven patients were referred for DGA during the nine-year period. Their mean age was 9.4 years (95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.4, 10.4) and 30.7% were children aged five years or younger. The most common reason for DGA was dental caries. The mean number of teeth extracted was 4.5 (95% CI = 4.1, 4.9). Patients living in deprived areas were more likely to be referred for DGA. Of the 87 who did not subsequently attend for continuing care, 72 were from deprived areas compared with 15 from more affluent areas (P=0.003).

Conclusions: In proportion to the number of patients registered at a practice, the number of referrals for DGAs was relatively low. Patients categorised as deprived (based on their residential postcode) received more referrals for DGAs than those from more affluent areas. Patients from deprived locations were significantly more likely not to attend for continuing care after their DGA than those from more affluent areas.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
审计牙科全麻转诊从一般牙科实践在南威尔士。
目的:本次审核的目的是量化1999年至2007年间接受牙科全身麻醉(DGA)的患者数量,这些患者是在普通牙科诊所转诊后接受的。它还旨在确定被转诊者的剥夺地位,并进一步调查这些患者的牙科治疗途径。方法:收集本院所有病历资料。收集的信息包括:邮政编码、性别、研究结束时的年龄、DGA发生时的年龄、DGA发生的原因、拔牙数量以及进一步护理的细节。在缺乏个人层面的社会经济数据的情况下,为了根据患者的邮政编码提供剥夺程度的衡量标准,每个记录都附加了剥夺分数(来自威尔士多重剥夺指数[WIMD])。结果:289例患者在9年期间被转诊为DGA。他们的平均年龄为9.4岁(95%可信区间[CI] = 8.4, 10.4), 30.7%为5岁或更小的儿童。DGA最常见的原因是龋齿。平均拔牙数为4.5颗(95% CI = 4.1, 4.9)。生活在贫困地区的患者更有可能被转诊为DGA。在87名随后没有接受持续护理的患者中,72名来自贫困地区,而15名来自较富裕地区(P=0.003)。结论:与在诊所登记的患者数量相比,DGAs的转诊数量相对较低。被归类为贫困的患者(基于他们的居住邮政编码)比那些来自更富裕地区的患者获得了更多的DGAs转诊。来自贫困地区的患者比来自富裕地区的患者更有可能在DGA后不参加继续护理。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reflections on the Faculty of General Dental Practice (UK) at 20 years. A patient's view of dentistry 20 years ago, now, and in 20 years' time. Primary Dental Care: past, present and future. Primary dental care: time to revise the definition? Prim Dent Care 2000. 7(3):93-96. Dental specialist lists: are they necessary?
×
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