What non-clinical factors influence the general dentist-specialist relationship in Canada?

BACKGROUND: The general dentist-specialist relationship is important for effective patient care and the professional environment. This study explores the non-clinical factors that may influence the general dentist-specialist relationship in Canada. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey of a sample of general dentists across Canada was conducted (N ≈ 11,300). The survey collected information on practitioner (e.g., age, gender, years of practice) and practice (e.g., location, ownership) factors. Two outcomes were assessed: not perceiving specialists as completely collegial and perceiving competitive pressure from specialists. Binary and multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 1328 general dentists responded, yielding a response rate of 11.7%. The strongest associations for perceiving specialists as not completely collegial include being a practice owner (OR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.23, 3.74), working in two or more practices (OR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.07, 2.65), practicing in a small population center (OR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.22, 0.94), and contributing equally to the household income (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.26, 0.84). The strongest associations with perceiving medium/large competitive pressure from specialists include having a general practice residency or advanced education in general dentistry (OR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.17, 3.41) and having specialists in close proximity to the practice (OR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.12, 5.69). CONCLUSION: Practitioner and practice factors, mostly related to business and dental care market dynamics, are associated with the potential for strained relationships between general dentists and specialists in Canada. This study points to the need for dental professional organizations to openly discuss the current state of the dental care market, as it has important implications for the profession.

Aerosol-generating procedures and associated control/mitigation measures: Position paper from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association and the American Dental Hygienists' Association.

Background: Since the outbreak of COVID-19, how to reduce the risk of spreading viruses and other microorganisms while performing aerosolgenerating procedures (AGPs) has become a challenging question within the dental and dental hygiene communities. The purpose of this position paper is to summarize the evidence of the effectiveness of various mitigation methods used to reduce the risk of infection transmission during AGPs in dentistry. Methods: The authors searched 6 databases-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar-for relevant scientific evidence published between January 2012 and December 2022 to answer 6 research questions about the risk of transmission, methods, devices, and personal protective equipment (PPE) used to reduce contact with microbial pathogens and limit the spread of aerosols. Results: A total of 78 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The literature on the risk of infection transmission including SARS-CoV-2 between dental hygienists and their patients is limited. Although several mouthrinses are effective in reducing bacterial contaminations in aerosols, their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 is also limited. The combined use of eyewear, masks, and face shields is effective in preventing contamination of the facial and nasal region while performing AGPs. High-volume evacuation with or without an intraoral suction, low-volume evacuation, saliva ejector, and rubber dam (when appropriate) have shown effectiveness in reducing aerosol transmission beyond the generation site. Finally, the appropriate combination of ventilation and filtration in dental operatories is effective in limiting the spread of aerosols. Discussion and Conclusion: Aerosols produced during clinical procedures can pose a risk of infection transmission between dental hygienists and their patients. The implementation of practices supported by available evidence will ensure greater patient and provider safety in oral health settings. More studies in oral health clinical environments would shape future practices and protocols, ultimately to ensure the delivery of safe clinical care.

Contexte: Depuis l'éclosion de la COVID-19, la façon de réduire le risque de propagation de virus et d'autres microorganismes tout en effectuant des interventions générant des aérosols (IGA) est devenue un enjeu complexe au sein des communautés de la médecine dentaire et de l'hygiène dentaire. L'objectif de cet exposé de position est de résumer les données probantes de l'efficacité des diverses méthodes d'atténuation utilisées pour réduire le risque de transmission des infections pendant les IGA en médecine dentaire. Méthodes: Les auteurs ont effectué des recherches dans MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library et Google Scholar pour trouver des preuves scientifiques pertinentes publiées entre janvier 2012 et décembre 2022 afin de répondre à 6 questions de recherche sur le risque de transmission, les méthodes, les dispositifs et l'équipement de protection individuelle (EPI) utilisés pour réduire le contact avec les agents pathogènes microbiens et limiter la propagation des aérosols. Résultats: Au total, 78 études ont satisfait aux critères d'admissibilité. La documentation est limitée en ce qui concerne le risque de transmission des infections, y compris le SRAS-CoV-2, entre les hygiénistes dentaires et leurs patients. Bien que plusieurs rince-bouches soient efficaces pour réduire la contamination bactérienne dans les aérosols, leur efficacité contre le SRAS-CoV-2 est limitée. L'utilisation combinée de lunettes, de masques et d'écrans faciaux est efficace pour prévenir la contamination de la région faciale et nasale lors de l'exécution d'IGA. L'évacuation à volume élevé avec ou sans aspiration intraorale, l'évacuation à faible volume, l'aspirateur de salive et la digue dentaire en caoutchouc (le cas échéant) ont démontré une efficacité à réduire la transmission des aérosols au-delà du site de production. Enfin, la combinaison appropriée de ventilation et de filtration dans les salles de traitement dentaire permet de limiter efficacement la propagation des aérosols. Discussion et conclusion: Les aérosols produits lors des interventions cliniques peuvent présenter un risque de transmission des infections entre les hygiénistes dentaires et leurs patients. La mise en oeuvre de pratiques appuyées par les données probantes disponibles assurera une plus grande sécurité des patients et des prestataires dans les milieux de santé buccodentaire. Un plus grand nombre d'études dans les environnements cliniques de santé buccodentaire permettrait de façonner les pratiques et les protocoles futurs dans le but d'assurer la prestation sécuritaire des soins cliniques.

Aerosol Generating Procedures and Associated Control/Mitigation Measures: A position paper from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association and the American Dental Hygienists' Association.

Background Since the outbreak of COVID-19, how to reduce the risk of spreading viruses and other microorganisms while performing aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) has become a challenging question within the dental and dental hygiene communities. The purpose of this position paper is to summarize the existing evidence about the effectiveness of various mitigation methods used to reduce the risk of infection transmission during AGPs in dentistry.Methods The authors searched six databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, for relevant scientific evidence published in the last ten years (January 2012 to December 2022) to answer six research questions about the the aspects of risk of transmission, methods, devices, and personal protective equipment (PPE) used to reduce contact with microbial pathogens and limit the spread of aerosols.Results A total of 78 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. There was limited literature to indicate the risk of infection transmission of SARS-CoV-2 between dental hygienists and their patients. A number of mouthrinses are effective in reducing bacterial contaminations in aerosols; however, their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 was limited. The combined use of eyewear, masks, and face shields are effective for the prevention of contamination of the facial and nasal region, while performing AGPs. High volume evacuation with or without an intraoral suction, low volume evacuation, saliva ejector, and rubber dam (when appropriate) have shown effectiveness in reducing aerosol transmission beyond the generation site. Finally, the appropriate combination of ventilation and filtration in dental operatories are effective in limiting the spread of aerosols.Conclusion Aerosols produced during clinical procedures can potentially pose a risk of infection transmission between dental hygienists and their patients. The implementation of practices supported by available evidence are best practices to ensure patient and provider safety in oral health settings. More studies in dental clinical environment would shape future practices and protocols, ultimately to ensure safe clinical care delivery.

General Dentists' Perceptions About Their Relationship With Specialists.

INTRODUCTION: This paper assesses the nature of the general dentist-specialist relationship, as perceived by general dentists in Canada. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was administered to general dentists across Canada who are part of the Canadian Dental Association register and who have consented to receiving email surveys (N ≈ 11,300). Information including sociodemographic and practitioner- and practice-related factors was collected using a 47-item questionnaire. The general dentist-specialist relationship was conceptualised on the basis of 4 factors: communication, confidence, competition, and referrals. Descriptive analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The response rate for the survey was 11.7% (n = 1328). Most general dentists specified that specialists sent timely information/reports (93%), were partners in delivering care (64%), presented little competitive pressure (87%), and were strongly collegial (85%). CONCLUSIONS: In general, the study demonstrated that Canadian general dentists held a positive perception of their relationship with the specialists.