Views of patients and general dental practitioners on the organizational aspects of a general dental practice.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the views of patients and general dental practitioners (GDPs) on the organizational aspects of a general dental practice and to see whether their views differ. BACKGROUND: Health care has increasingly centred on the patient over the last two decades, and the patients' opinions have been taken more seriously. Although in other health-care sectors research on organizational aspects has been performed, research in dental care is lacking on this subject. DESIGN: We developed two questionnaires covering 41 organizational aspects of a general dental practice: one for GDPs and one for dental patients. The questionnaires were handed out in dental practices to 5000 patients and sent to 500 GDPs. RESULTS: We describe the results of the organizational aspects mentioned most by 25% of the dental patients. For most aspects, the views of the patients and GDPs differed significantly. However, both respondent groups mentioned the same category the most. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study could be used on a policy level for the development of guidelines and on a practice level for individual GDPs to adjust practice management to the preferences of patients.

Patients' priorities in assessing organisational aspects of a general dental practice.

OBJECTIVES: To explore which organisational aspects are considered most important by patients when assessing a general dental practice, and which patients' characteristics influence their views on these aspects by a paper questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS: The questionnaire was handed out to a sample of 5,000 patients in the Netherlands. RESULTS: The response rate was 63%. Six organisational aspects out of a list of 41 aspects were valued as most important by at least 50%. In decreasing order of importance, these were: accessibility by telephone; continuing education for general dental practitioners; Dutch-speaking general dental practitioners; in-office waiting times; information about treatments offered; and waiting lists. For four out of these six aspects, respondents' age and education significantly influenced their preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Aspects concerning the infrastructure of a general dental practice were chosen more often than aspects such as working to professional standards, working according to protocols and guidelines, quality assessment and guaranteed treatment outcomes. The findings will enable organisations to increase the transparency of health-care delivery systems to focus on those organisational aspects of dental practices that patients themselves consider most important. These findings can also assist general dental practitioners in adapting their organisational services to the preferences of patients or specific patient groups.

The estimation of patients' views on organizational aspects of a general dental practice by general dental practitioners: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: Considering the changes in dental healthcare, such as the increasing assertiveness of patients, the introduction of new dental professionals, and regulated competition, it becomes more important that general dental practitioners (GDPs) take patients' views into account. The aim of the study was to compare patients' views on organizational aspects of general dental practices with those of GDPs and with GDPs' estimation of patients' views. METHODS: In a survey study, patients and GDPs provided their views on organizational aspects of a general dental practice. In a second, separate survey, GDPs were invited to estimate patients' views on 22 organizational aspects of a general dental practice. RESULTS: For 4 of the 22 aspects, patients and GDPs had the same views, and GDPs estimated patients' views reasonably well: 'Dutch-speaking GDP', 'guarantee on treatment', 'treatment by the same GDP', and 'reminder of routine oral examination'. For 2 aspects ('quality assessment' and 'accessibility for disabled patients') patients and GDPs had the same standards, although the GDPs underestimated the patients' standards. Patients had higher standards than GDPs for 7 aspects and lower standards than GDPs for 8 aspects. CONCLUSION: On most aspects GDPs and patient have different views, except for social desirable aspects. Given the increasing assertiveness of patients, it is startling the GDP's estimated only half of the patients' views correctly. The findings of the study can assist GDPs in adapting their organizational services to better meet the preferences of their patients and to improve the communication towards patients.