Key Points
-
Gives evidence of a difference in patient satisfaction with care given by dental therapists, compared to dentists.
-
Differences were not confined to patient satisfaction with information-communication, but differences in patient satisfaction with technical competence and understanding-acceptance were also seen.
-
Opens up a new line of research relating to why such differences are apparent.
Abstract
Introduction Patient reported outcomes of care are increasingly used as a measure of the quality of care. There has been a recent expansion in the number of dental therapists trained in the UK, and with legislation now permitting therapists to take on a wider role in dental practice, patients' perceptions about quality of care provided by therapists is an important issue.
Objectives To investigate whether there were any differences in patient satisfaction after a visit to a therapist, compared to a visit to a dentist.
Method A ten-item scale of patient satisfaction (Dental Visit Satisfaction Scale), which provides an outcome measure of overall patient satisfaction as well as three sub-scale outcomes (information-communication; understanding-acceptance; and technical competence) was used. A total of 240 questionnaires were given to consecutive patients attending an appointment with a therapist and 400 questionnaires were given to patients attending dentists, in eight different dental practices.
Results Four hundred and thirty-one (67.3%) questionnaires were returned. Patients attending therapists were found to have a significantly higher level of overall satisfaction (p <0.001) and also in all three sub-scales (p <0.001), than those attending appointments with dentists.
Conclusion Although a clear distinction in patient satisfaction according to the type of provider was found, the reasons behind this finding are unclear, and so care needs to be taken in interpreting the results, with further work undertaken to explore this phenomenon more fully.
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Jones G, Evans C, Hunter L . A survey of the workload of dental therapists/hygienist-therapists employed in primary care settings. Br Dent J 2008; 204: E5.
Rowbotham J S, Godson J H, Williams S A, Csikar J I, Bradley S . Dental therapy in the United Kingdom: part 1. Developments in therapists' training and role. Br Dent J 2009; 207: 355–359.
Godson J H, Williams S A, Csikar J I, Bradley S, Rowbotham J S . Dental therapy in the United Kingdom: part 2. A survey of reported working practices. Br Dent J 2009; 207: 417–423.
Williams S A, Bradley S, Godson J H, Csikar J I, Rowbotham J S . Dental therapy in the United Kingdom: part 3. Financial aspects of current working practices. Br Dent J 2009; 207: 477–483.
Csikar J I, Bradley S, Williams S A, Godson J H, Rowbotham J S . Dental therapy in the United Kingdom: part 4. Teamwork – is it working for dental therapists? Br Dent J 2009; 207: 529–536.
Ross M K, Ibbetson R J, Turner S . The acceptability of dually-qualified dental hygienist-therapists to general dental practitioners in South-East Scotland. Br Dent J 2007; 202: E8.
Jones G, Devalia R, Hunter L . Attitudes of general dental practitioners in Wales towards employing dental hygienist-therapists. Br Dent J 2007; 203: E19.
Dyer T A, Humphris G, Robinson P G . Public awareness and social acceptability of dental therapists. Br Dent J 2010; 208: E2.
Dyer T A, Humphris G, Robinson P G . Public awareness and social acceptability of dental therapists. Br Dent J 2010; 208: E2.
Evans C, Chestnutt I G, Chadwick B L . The potential for delegation of clinical care in general dental practice. Br Dent J 2007; 203: 695–699.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Robinson, P. Summary of: Patient satisfaction with care by dental therapists. Br Dent J 208, 212–213 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2010.230
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2010.230
