Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36532938›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Effectiveness of Phone Call Follow-Ups in Improving Patient Compliance to Post-extraction Instructions: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Sundar Ramalingam, Obaid Alotaibi, Ziyad Alqudairy, Abdulrahman Alnutaifi, Abdulaziz Alotaibi

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07751822 (Effectiveness of Telephonic and Digital Postoperative Follow-up Communication Strategies on Patient Compliance, Clinical Recovery, and Oral Health-related Quality of Life Following Dental Extraction), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT07751822 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of Telephonic and Digital Postoperative Follow-up Communication Strategies on Patient Compliance, Clinical Recovery, and Oral Health-related Quality of Life Following Dental Extraction

TypeinterventionalSponsorKing Saud UniversityRan2026 to 2027Enrolled216ConditionsTooth Extraction, Postoperative Care, Patient ComplianceArmsTelephonic Postoperative Follow-up, Digital Postoperative Follow-up, Standard Postoperative Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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.

Sundar RamalingamOral and Maxillofacial Surgery, King Saud University College of Dentistry, Riyadh, SAU.
Obaid AlotaibiCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Ziyad AlqudairyCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Abdulrahman AlnutaifiCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Abdulaziz AlotaibiCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Dental extraction is a commonly performed oral surgical procedure. The manner in which post-extraction instructions are given to patients may impact their understanding and adherence to instructions. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of phone call follow-ups over conventional verbal and written post-extraction instructions in terms of patient compliance in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methodology After obtaining informed consent, patients undergoing dental extraction at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery were randomly enrolled into one of the three groups based on the mode by which post-extraction instructions were administered. Group A received verbal and written instructions only, and Group B and Group C received additional phone call follow-up on the first postoperative day and the first and third postoperative days, respectively. After seven days, all patients answered a questionnaire to quantify the level of compliance on a score out of 10, which was the outcome variable. The nature of receiving post-extraction instruction was the primary predictor variable. Age, gender, and type of extraction (surgical or non-surgical) were secondary predictors. Descriptive statistical analysis and statistical comparison of mean compliance scores between the groups and the effect of interaction between primary and secondary predictors on the outcome variable were carried out at a 95% significance level (p < 0.05). Results A total of 135 patients (75 males and 60 females; mean age = 36.2 years) were included in the study. While the overall mean compliance score was 8.36 ± 1.08, Group C (9.14 ± 0.78, n = 42) had a significantly higher level of compliance than Group B (8.48 ± 1.01, n = 40) and Group A (7.64 ± 0.83, n = 53) (one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) F = 34.937; p < 0.001). Similarly, the level of compliance in Group B was significantly higher than that in Group A (p < 0.01). There was no significant statistical relationship between the secondary predictors and the compliance scores. Similarly, two-way ANOVA revealed no statistically significant effect of interaction between the primary and secondary predictor variables on the compliance scores. Individually, the least complied instruction, across all groups, was "rinsing with saline once every six hours for four days," and "biting on a gauze pack for 30 minutes" was the most complied instruction. Conclusions Phone call follow-up after teeth extraction improves patient compliance with post-extraction instructions through reinforcement and education. While a single phone call follow-up one day after extraction along with verbal and written instructions increased patient compliance significantly, a second phone call follow-up on the third postoperative day yielded the best level of compliance.

Indexed as

patient compliancepatient educationphone call follow-uppost-extraction instructionspostoperative complications

Identifiers

PMID36532938
PMCPMC9750235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.