ArticleHuman resources for health2024
How to ensure an appropriate oral health workforce? Modelling future scenarios for the Netherlands.
Article in Human resources for health, 2024. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent methods for oral health workforce planning lack responsiveness to dynamic needs, hampering efficiency, equity and sustainability. Effective workforce planning is vital for resilient health care systems and achieving universal health coverage. Given this context, we developed and operationalised a needs-adaptive oral health workforce planning model and explored the potential of various future scenarios.
methodsUsing publicly available data, including the Special Eurobarometer 330 Oral Health Survey, we applied the model in a hypothetical context focusing on the Dutch population's dental needs from 2022 to 2050. We compared current and future provider supply and requirement and examined, in addition to a base case scenario, several alternative scenarios. These included epidemiological transition scenarios with different oral health morbidity trajectories, skill-mix scenarios with independent oral hygienists conducting check-ups and multiple dental student intake and training duration (5 instead of 6 years) scenarios.
resultsBased on the aforementioned historical data, our model projects that provider requirement will exceed supply for the planning period. If the percentage of people having all natural teeth increases by 10% or 20% in 2032, 34 or 68 additional full-time equivalent (FTE) dentists will be required, respectively, compared to the base case scenario. In the skill-mix scenario, the model indicates that prioritising oral hygienists for check-ups and shifting dentists' focus to primarily complex care could address population needs more efficiently. Among the student intake and training duration scenarios, increasing intake to 375 and, to a lesser extent, reducing training to 5 years is projected to most effectively close the provider gap.
conclusionsThe study underscores the importance of understanding oral health morbidity trajectories for effective capacity planning. Due to limited dental epidemiological data, projections carry substantial uncertainty. Currently, demand for FTE dentists seems to exceed supply, though this may vary with epidemiological changes. Skill-mix strategies could offer efficiency gains by redistributing tasks, while adjustments in dental intake and training duration could also help address the requirement-supply gap. Resolving dentistry workforce challenges requires a multifaceted approach, including strengthening oral epidemiology projections, addressing the root causes of dental health issues and prioritising harmonious dental public health and general practice prevention measures.
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.