ArticleBritish dental journal2014
Managing patients on bisphosphonates: the practice of primary care dentists before and after the publication of national guidance.
Article in British dental journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adopting the COM-B model and TDF framework in oral and dental research: A narrative review.Community dentistry and oral epidemiology · 2021Review
- Patient-, organization-, and system-level barriers and facilitators to preventive oral health care: a convergent mixed-methods study in primary dental care.Implementation science : IS · 2016Article
- Summary of: managing patients on bisphosphonates: the practice of primary care dentists before and after the publication of national guidance.British dental journal · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn April 2011 the Scottish Dental Clinical Effectiveness Programme published the Oral health management of patients prescribed bisphosphonates guidance document. The aims of this study were to examine whether dentists' practice and beliefs changed after guidance publication to determine whether a knowledge translation intervention was required, and to inform its development.
methodsThree postal surveys sent to three independent, random samples of dentists throughout Scotland pre- and post-guidance publication. The questionnaire, framed using the theoretical domains framework (TDF), assessed current practice and beliefs relating to recommended management of patients on bisphosphonates.
resultsThe results (N = 420) suggest that any significant impact the guidance may have had on the recommended management of patients on bisphosphonates by primary care dentists, had reached its peak ten months post publication. A more positive attitude, greater perceived ability, and greater motivation were all associated with significantly more performing of all recommended behaviours at every time point.
conclusionsPrior to this study, there was little available information about how patients on bisphosphonates were being managed in primary dental care, or what beliefs may be influencing management decisions. This study was able to identify levels of compliance pre- and post-guidance publication and determine that further intervention was necessary to enable sustained uptake of recommendations. Using the TDF to identify beliefs associated with best practice made it possible to suggest theoretically informed strategies for service improvement. The next step is to test the intervention(s) in a randomised controlled trial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25525031What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.