The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 5 , ISSUE 4 ( November, 2004 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Survey of Dental Prophylaxes Rendered by Pediatric Dentists in New England

S.M. Hashim Nainar, Deborah A. Redford-Badwal

Citation Information : Nainar SH, Redford-Badwal DA. Survey of Dental Prophylaxes Rendered by Pediatric Dentists in New England. J Contemp Dent Pract 2004; 5 (4):14-22.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-5-4-14

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-05-2006

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2004; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background

The objective of this anonymous postal survey was to assess the provision of dental prophylaxis by pediatric dentists in New England.

Methods

The questionnaire survey was sent by first class mail in September, 2001 to all 217 American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD) members in active private practice in the six New England States of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. A self-addressed, stamped envelope was provided to facilitate the returned response.

Results

The survey had a response rate of 70%. Most practitioners (93%) routinely recommended dental prophylaxis for their recall patients. The proportion of practitioners who considered the following indications for recommending dental prophylaxis was: plaque, stain, and/or calculus removal – 99%; caries prevention – 75%; prior to topical fluoride application - 82%; prior to sealant application - 58%; and for behavioral modification - 68%. Almost two thirds of the practitioners (62%) defined dental prophylaxis as referring to both rubber cup pumice prophylaxis as well as to toothbrush prophylaxis. However, only one in four practitioners (26%) had modified her/his clinical practice to substitute toothbrush prophylaxis in lieu of rubber cup pumice prophylaxis.

Conclusion

Pediatric dentists in New England routinely provide dental prophylaxis to their recall patients.

Citation

Nainar SMH, Redford-Badwal DA. Survey of Dental Prophylaxes Rendered by Pediatric Dentists in New England . J Contemp Dent Pract 2004 November;(5)4:014-022.

PDF Share
  1. History of dental prophylaxis. J Am Dent Assoc. 1967 Oct;75(4):892-5. No abstract available.
  2. Sodium fluoride solutions: technic for application to the teeth. J Am Dent Assoc. 1948;36:37-9.
  3. Clinical guideline on the role of prophylaxis in pediatric dentistry (Reference Manual 2001-2002). Pediatr Dent 2001;23(7):39.
  4. Ontario dentists’ knowledge and beliefs about selected aspects of diagnosis, prevention and restorative dentistry. Can Dent Assoc J 1996;62:337-44.
  5. Trends in dental care among insured Americans: 1980 to 1995. J Am Dent Assoc. 1997 Feb;128(2):171-8.
  6. An analysis of dental visits in U.S. children, by category of service and sociodemographic factors, 1996. Pediatr Dent. 2001 Sep-Oct;23(5):383-9.
  7. Trends in per-patient gross income to dental practices from insured patients, 1980-1995. J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 Nov;129(11):1559-65.
  8. Oral Health of United States children – The National Survey of Dental Caries in U.S. School Children: 1986-1987. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, NIH Publication No.89-2247, September, 1989.
  9. The American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry Foundation and Oral-B Checkup on Children's Oral Health Study (Research report), January, 2002. Available at: http://www.aapd.org/pdf/AAPDReport.pdf. Accessed May 14, 2002.
  10. A mail survey of United States hematologists and oncologists: a comparison of business reply versus stamped return envelopes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Apr;54(4):430-2.
  11. al. Comparison of open and closed questionnaire formats in obtaining demographic information from Canadian general internists. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999 Oct;52(10):997-1005.
  12. Dental caries – another extinct disease? In Cariology for the Nineties. WH Bowen, LA Tabak, EDS. University of Rochester Press, 1993, pp 4.
  13. al. The University of North Carolina Caries Risk Assessment study: further developments in caries risk prediction. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1992 Apr;20(2):64-75.
  14. Prevention in the dental office: results of a preventive dentistry survey. American Dental Association Health Foundation. J Am Dent Assoc. 1984 May;108(5):809, 811-2, 815 passim. No abstract available.
  15. Effect of monthly prophylaxis on caries and gingivitis in schoolchildren. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1975 Feb;3(1):1-4. No abstract available.
  16. Effect of proper oral hygiene on gingivitis and dental caries in Swedish schoolchildren. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1975 Aug;3(4):150-5.
  17. al. The effect of professional toothcleansing on gingivitis and dental caries in children after 1 year. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1976 Sep;4(5):195-9.
  18. al. Effect of a field program based on systematic plaque control on caries and gingivitis in schoolchildren after 3 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1978 Jan;6(1):17-23.
  19. Periodic health examination, 1995 update: 2. Prevention of dental caries. The Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. CMAJ. 1995 Mar 15;152(6):836-46.
  20. Dentists’ perceptions of selected characteristics of their child patients. Pediatr Dent. 1994 Jul-Aug;16(4):268-71.
  21. The effect of prior toothcleaning on the efficacy of topical fluoride treatment. Two-year results. Clin Prev Dent. 1983 Jul-Aug;5(4):8-10. No abstract available.
  22. al. Effect of prior toothcleaning on bi-annual professional acidulated phosphate fluoride topical fluoride gel-tray treatments. Results after three years. Caries Res. 1984;18(5):457-64. No abstract available.
  23. al. Comparison of dental prophylaxis and toothbrushing prior to topical APF applications. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1985 Aug;13(4):208-11.
  24. Clinical guideline on fluoride therapy (Reference Manual 2001-2002). Pediatr Dent 2001;23(7):40.
  25. A double-blind clinical trial to determine the importance of pumice prophylaxis on fissure sealant retention. Br Dent J. 1988 Oct 22;165(8):283-6. No abstract available.
  26. al. Clinical sealant retention following two different tooth-cleaning techniques. J Public Health Dent. 1998 Summer;58(3):254-6.
  27. Prevention. How much harm? How much benefit? 4. The ethics of informed consent for preventive screening programs. CMAJ. 1996 Aug 15;155(4):377-83. Review.
  28. Tradition-based dental care and evidence-based dental care. J Dent Res. 1999 Jul;78(7):1288-91. No abstract available.
  29. Changing physician behaviour. Arch Dis Child. 2001 Jun;84(6):459-62. No abstract available.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.