Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros




Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Dent Educ ; 82(4): 340-348, 2018 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29606650

RESUMEN

Diagnostic errors are increasingly recognized as a source of preventable harm in medicine, yet little is known about their occurrence in dentistry. The aim of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of clinical dental faculty members' perceptions of diagnostic errors, types of errors that may occur, and possible contributing factors. The authors conducted semi-structured interviews with ten domain experts at one U.S. dental school in May-August 2016 about their perceptions of diagnostic errors and their causes. The interviews were analyzed using an inductive process to identify themes and key findings. The results showed that the participants varied in their definitions of diagnostic errors. While all identified missed diagnosis and wrong diagnosis, only four participants perceived that a delay in diagnosis was a diagnostic error. Some participants perceived that an error occurs only when the choice of treatment leads to harm. Contributing factors associated with diagnostic errors included the knowledge and skills of the dentist, not taking adequate time, lack of communication among colleagues, and cognitive biases such as premature closure based on previous experience. Strategies suggested by the participants to prevent these errors were taking adequate time when investigating a case, forming study groups, increasing communication, and putting more emphasis on differential diagnosis. These interviews revealed differing perceptions of dental diagnostic errors among clinical dental faculty members. To address the variations, the authors recommend adopting shared language developed by the medical profession to increase understanding.


Asunto(s)
Errores Diagnósticos/prevención & control , Docentes de Odontología/psicología , Percepción , Conducta , Competencia Clínica , Comunicación , Odontología , Educación en Odontología , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Humanos , Manejo de Atención al Paciente , Facultades de Odontología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Texas
2.
J Endod ; 41(5): 692-5, 2015 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25726385

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is an electronic device that emits electrical signals to the heart via lead wires and electrodes. It is used for cardiac rhythm monitoring and treatment. Because electronic dental devices have been shown to produce electromagnetic fields, we hypothesize that they may interfere with ICD function. METHODS: Nine dental devices (heat carrier, electronic apex locator, electric pulp tester, unipolar electrosurgery unit, electric motor, curing light, and 3 gutta-percha guns) were tested in this study for their ability to interfere with the function of 4 ICDs (2 single-chambered and 2 dual-chambered ICDs). ICD activity was monitored for 30 seconds using an ICD programmer (Medtronic 2090; Minneapolis, MN) and evaluated through an electrogram test strip printout. RESULTS: Electromagnetic interference was detected with the electric motor, curing light, electric pulp tester, and electrosurgery unit although no electromagnetic disturbances were detected with these devices. No electromagnetic interferences were observed for the gutta-percha guns, heat carrier, and apex locator. However, the electrosurgery unit affected the dual-chambered ICD (Consulta CRT-D, Medtronic) and delivered therapies for fibrillation when no ventricular fibrillation was present. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the electrosurgery unit produces electromagnetic disturbances with unwanted therapy delivery shock and potentially clinically significant outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Desfibriladores Implantables , Equipo Dental/efectos adversos , Campos Electromagnéticos , Electrocirugia/instrumentación , Seguridad de Equipos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA