Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34953109›Full record

ArticleJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2022

Communication tools and patient satisfaction: A scoping review.

Romane Touati, Irena Sailer, Laurent Marchand, Maxime Ducret, Malin Strasding

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Communication tools and patient satisfaction: A scoping review.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Romane TouatiFaculty of Odontology, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, University of Lyon, Lyon, France.
Irena SailerDivision of Fixed Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Laurent MarchandDivision of Fixed Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Maxime DucretFaculty of Odontology, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, University of Lyon, Lyon, France.
Malin StrasdingDivision of Fixed Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1679-6202

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis scoping review aimed to present an overview of the literature on communication tools in esthetic dentistry. A variety of communication tools have been proposed to include patients in the shared decision-making (SDM) workflow. Only little is known about implementing communication tools in dentistry and their impact on patient communication and patient satisfaction. A systematic literature search was performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and World of Science to identify if communication tools have an impact on patient satisfaction. MATERIAL AND

methodsThe search included studies from January 1, 2000 to March 3, 2020 published in English, focusing on patient communication tools and patient satisfaction in esthetic dentistry.

resultsOut of 6678 records, 53 full-texts were examined. Ten studies were included. Data of the included studies were extracted systematically and subsequently analyzed. All studies found that patient communication utilizing specific communication tools positively impacted either patient satisfaction, patient-dentist relationship, information retention, treatment acceptance, quality of care or treatment outcome.

conclusionsAdditional communication tools besides conventional verbal communication are able to enhance patient satisfaction, improve quality of care and establish a better patient-dentist relationship. It seems essential to further develop standardized communication tools for SDM in dental medicine, which will allow the comparison of research on this topic. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This scoping review shows the importance of patient involvement in the decision-making process for improved patient satisfaction with esthetic dental treatments. With an increased implementation of communication tools, patient satisfaction and SDM may further improve in the future.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationPatient SatisfactionCommunicationDecision MakingHumansesthetic dentistrypatient communication toolspatient satisfactionscoping reviewshared decision making

Identifiers

PMID34953109
PMCPMC9305134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.