ArticleInternational dental journal2018
Variations in Australian dental therapy practice by practitioner and workplace characteristics.
Article in International dental journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUnderstanding dental therapy practice across clinical settings is useful for education and service planning. This study assessed if dental therapy service provision varied according to practitioner and workplace characteristics.
methodsMembers of professional associations representing dental therapists (DT) and oral health therapists (OHT) were posted a self-complete survey collecting practitioner and workplace characteristics, together with clinical activity on a self-selected typical day of practice. Differences in service provision according to characteristics were assessed by comparing mean services per patient visit. Negative binomial regression models estimated adjusted ratios (R) of mean services per patient.
resultsThe response rate was 60.6%. Of practitioners registered as an OHT or a DT, 80.0% (n = 500) were employed in general clinical practice. Nearly one-third of OHT and nearly two-thirds of DT worked in public sector dental services. Patterns of service provision varied significantly according to practice sector and other characteristics. After adjusting for characteristics, relative to private sector, public sector practitioners had higher provision rates of fissure sealants (R = 3.79, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 2.84-5.06), restorations (R = 3.78, 95% CI: 2.94-4.86) and deciduous tooth extractions (R = 3.58, 95% CI: 2.60-4.93) per patient visit, and lower provision rates of oral health instruction (R = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.76-0.98), fluoride applications (R = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33-0.56), scale and cleans (R = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.34-0.45) and periodontal services (R = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.14-0.28) per patient visit.
conclusionDifferences in service provision according to sector indicate that OHT and DT adapt to differing patient groups and models of care. Variations may also indicate that barriers to utilising the full scope of practice exist in some settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.