Periodontal screening and referral behaviour of general dental practitioners in Flanders

Objectives: The objective of this study was to investigate the screening and referral behaviour of Flemish dentists concerning periodontitis and more specific, the use of the Dutch Periodontal Screening Index (DPSI). Materials and methods: An online questionnaire was electronically distributed throu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dekeyser, C. (Author), Favril, C. (Author), Laleman, I. (Author), Meers, E. (Author), Quirynen, M. (Author), Teughels, W. (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Springer Verlag 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 03133nam a2200433Ia 4500
001 10.1007-s00784-017-2212-1
008 220706s2018 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 14326981 (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a Periodontal screening and referral behaviour of general dental practitioners in Flanders 
260 0 |b Springer Verlag  |c 2018 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2212-1 
520 3 |a Objectives: The objective of this study was to investigate the screening and referral behaviour of Flemish dentists concerning periodontitis and more specific, the use of the Dutch Periodontal Screening Index (DPSI). Materials and methods: An online questionnaire was electronically distributed through the different professional dental societies. It consisted of two parts: the first aimed at describing the profile of the dentist. The second part inquired the screening method, when this was applied, periodontal risk factors and referral behaviour. Results: One thousand fifty dentists attended to the questionnaire. One hundred fifty-nine questionnaires were excluded since they did not match the target audience. Sixty-four percent of Flemish dentists used DPSI as a periodontal screening method, 28% screened based on probing pocket depth, 4% used solely radiographs and 4% had no screening method at all. The usage of DPSI is influenced by the year of graduation: the longer the dentists were graduated, the less they used DPSI. No influence of sex, education centre and location was found. Referral behaviour is influenced by different patient- and dentist-related factors. Conclusions: Regarding the screening behaviour, there seems a consensus among Flemish dentists that a periodontal probe should be used. For referral, there is no consensus about if and when to refer to a specialist. Clinical relevance: It is encouraging that 92% of the Flemish general dental practitioners use a probe when screening for periodontitis. However, DPSI is mainly used by younger dentists. An effort should be made to encourage all dentists to use this, so that in every patient, periodontitis can be detected timely, securing the best treatment outcome. © 2017, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany. 
650 0 4 |a Belgium 
650 0 4 |a clinical practice 
650 0 4 |a consensus 
650 0 4 |a Consensus 
650 0 4 |a Dutch periodontal screening index (DPSI) 
650 0 4 |a general practice 
650 0 4 |a General Practice, Dental 
650 0 4 |a human 
650 0 4 |a Humans 
650 0 4 |a patient referral 
650 0 4 |a periodontal disease 
650 0 4 |a Periodontal Diseases 
650 0 4 |a Periodontitis 
650 0 4 |a Practice Patterns, Dentists' 
650 0 4 |a questionnaire 
650 0 4 |a Referral and Consultation 
650 0 4 |a Referral behaviour 
650 0 4 |a Screening 
650 0 4 |a statistics and numerical data 
650 0 4 |a Surveys and Questionnaires 
700 1 |a Dekeyser, C.  |e author 
700 1 |a Favril, C.  |e author 
700 1 |a Laleman, I.  |e author 
700 1 |a Meers, E.  |e author 
700 1 |a Quirynen, M.  |e author 
700 1 |a Teughels, W.  |e author 
773 |t Clinical Oral Investigations