Peri-implantitis prevalence and treatment in implant-oriented private practices: a cross-sectional postal and Internet survey.

This survey aimed to estimate the subjective prevalence of peri-implantitis and its management in the private with and without board certified specialization. For this purpose, a cross-sectional postal and internet survey of 521 dentists, representing all members of the Swiss Society of Oral Implantology (SGI) was conducted (year 2010). The questionnaire consisted of four sections assessing 1) general information regarding the practice setting and education, 2) general questions regarding implantation profile and 3) specific questions regarding the prevalence and experience with the management of peri-implantitis. In the fourth section, therapy options of three exemplary cases were assessed. The data were separately evaluated and compared for specialists (S) and n₋specialists (N-S). A total of 253 questionnaires could be included in the present study. The results revealed that specialists placed significantly more implants than non-specialists. The subjective prevalence of cases with peri₋implantitis was 5-6 and 7-9% after 5 and 10 years, respectively. The polled dentists perceived periodontitis (N-S: 72%; S: 80%), smoking (N-S: 71; S: 77%) and bad compliance (S: 53; N-S: 61%) as the most important risk factors for peri-implantitis. Chlorhexidine was the most frequently used antiseptic agent for disinfection. A surgical approach to treat peri-implantitis was reported by more than 80% of all dentists. Specialists used significantly more resective or regenerative approaches than non-specialists.

Practice activity trends among oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Australia.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe practice activity trends among oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Australia over time. METHODS: All registered oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Australia were surveyed in 1990 and 2000 using mailed self-complete questionnaires. RESULTS: Data were available from 79 surgeons from 1990 (response rate = 73.8%) and 116 surgeons from 2000 (response rate = 65.1%). The rate of provision of services per visit changed over time with increased rates observed overall (from 1.43 +/- 0.05 services per visit in 1990 to 1.66 +/- 0.06 services per visit in 2000), reflecting increases in pathology and reconstructive surgery. No change over time was observed in the provision of services per year (4,521 +/- 286 services per year in 1990 and 4,503 +/- 367 services per year in 2000). Time devoted to work showed no significant change over time (1,682 +/- 75 hours per year in 1990 and 1,681 +/- 94 hours per year in 2000), while the number of visits per week declined (70 +/- 4 visits per week in 1990 to 58 +/- 4 visits per week in 2000). CONCLUSIONS: The apparent stability in the volume of services provided per year reflected a counterbalancing of increased services provided per visit and a decrease in the number of visits supplied.

Gender differences in career and practice patterns of PGD-trained dentists.

This study compares differences by gender in the practice patterns and professional activities of general dentists, specialists, and dentists with Advanced Education in General Dentistry (AEGD) or General Practice Residency (GPR) training. The UCLA School of Dentistry surveyed a random sample of 6,725 dentists graduating from dental school in 1989, 1993, and 1997 as part of an evaluation of the impact of federal funding on postgraduate general dentist (PGD) programs. The survey asked about current practice, services referred and provided, and professional activities. Of the 2,029 dentists (30 percent) who responded, 49 percent were general dentists with no specialty training; 7 percent had AEGD training; 20 percent had GPR training; and 24 percent had specialty training. General dentists were more likely to be in private practice (p < 0.05). AEGDs, specialists, and females were more likely to report faculty positions as a secondary occupation. General dentists were more likely to be practice owners than AEGD- or GPR-trained dentists. The mean number of patients seen was highest for specialists. Females reported fewer patients than males, and this difference was significant for GPR-trained dentists. With respect to services, GPR-trained dentists reported significantly more biopsy procedures, conscious sedation, periodontal surgery, and implants than general dentists. AEGD-trained dentists reported more conscious sedation than general dentists. GPR dentists were more likely to volunteer time than general dentists without specialty training. PGD training appears to result in different types of employment and specific practice patterns that strengthen primary care dentistry. We further conclude that there are gender differences in the types of practice, patients seen, and services provided. These findings occur in addition to training differences.

Dentists' attitudes to cross-infection control.

The wearing of gloves by dentists undertaking clinical procedures has been recommended by many authorities as an essential element of dental surgery cross-infection control. This paper reports an investigation into patterns of glove-wearing by practising dentists, and considers the effect of practice location and practising arrangements on this issue and other aspects of cross-infection control. The results show that these factors, including the type of patient treated, may influence the pattern of glove-wearing by dentists in England and Wales. These findings suggest that groups least likely to follow the recommended infection control procedures should be targeted when assessing dental education requirements.