Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26613736›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2015

Systematic review of patient safety interventions in dentistry.

Edmund Bailey, Martin Tickle, Stephen Campbell, Lucy O'Malley

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Preventing Wrong Tooth Extraction.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 2021
    Article
  15. Wrong-sided?British dental journal · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Never events: Patient safety definitions.British dental journal · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Edmund BaileyNIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Population Health - Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, 7th Floor: Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. Edmund.bailey@manchester.ac.uk.
Martin TickleNIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Population Health - Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, 7th Floor: Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. martin.tickle@manchester.ac.uk.
Stephen CampbellNIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Institute of Population Health - Centre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, 7th Floor: Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. Stephen.campbell@manchester.ac.uk.
Lucy O'MalleySchool of Dentistry, University of Manchester, J R Moore Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. lucy.omalley@manchester.ac.uk.
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-DG-1211-10007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe concept of patient safety in dentistry is in its infancy, with little knowledge about the effectiveness of tools or interventions developed to improve patient safety or to minimise the occurrence of adverse events.

methodsThe aim of this qualitative systematic review was to search the academic and grey literature to identify and assess tools or interventions used in dental care settings to maintain or improve patient safety. All study designs were included from all dental care settings. Outcome measures were: patient safety, harm prevention, risk minimization, patient satisfaction and patient acceptability, professional acceptability, efficacy, cost-effectiveness and efficiency. Quality assessments were performed on the included studies based on CASP tools. Further analysis was undertaken to discover whether any of the tools had been trialled or verified by the authors, or by subsequent authors.

resultsFollowing abstract screening, and initial qualitative synthesis, nine studies were found to meet the inclusion criteria with 31 being excluded following initial analysis. Tools identified included: checklists (4 studies), reporting systems (3), the use of electronic notes (1) and trigger tools (1). Grey literature searching did not identify any further appropriate studies. In terms of study design, there were observational studies including audit cycles (5 studies), epidemiological studies (3) and prospective cluster randomised clinical trials (1). The quality of the studies varied and none of their outcomes were verified by other researchers. The tools identified have the potential to be used for measuring and improving patient safety in dentistry, with two surgical safety checklists demonstrating a reduction in erroneous dental extractions to nil following their introduction. Reporting systems provide epidemiological data, however, it is not known whether they lead to any improvement in patient safety. The one study on trigger tools demonstrates a 50 % positive predictive value for safety incidents. It is not clear as to what impact the introduction of electronic guidelines has on patient safety outcomes.

conclusionsThis systematic review finds that the only interventions in dentistry that reduce or minimise adverse events are surgical safety checklists. We believe this to be the first systematic review in this field; it demonstrates the need for further research into patient safety in dentistry across several domains: epidemiological, conceptual understanding and patient and practitioner involvement.

Indexed as

DentistryPatient SafetyCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID26613736
PMCPMC4662809
OpenAlexW2177860856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.