Molar-incisor hypomineralisation combat: exploratory qualitative interviews with general dental practitioners in England regarding the management of children with molar-incisor hypomineralisation

Molar incisor hypomineralisation: Teaching and assessment across the undergraduate dental curricula in the UK

BACKGROUND

No consensus exists on how molar incisor hypomineralisation (MIH) should be covered by the undergraduate dental curricula.

AIM

To assess the current teaching and assessment of MIH in the UK.

DESIGN

A piloted questionnaire regarding the teaching and assessment of MIH was disseminated to paediatric, restorative and orthodontic teaching leads in each UK dental school (n = 16). Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi-squared and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

RESULTS

Response rates from paediatric, restorative and orthodontic teams were 75% (n = 12), 44% (n = 7) and 54% (n = 8), respectively. Prevention of caries, preformed metal crowns, anterior resin composites and vital bleaching were taught significantly more by paediatric teams (p = .006). Quality of life and resin infiltration were absent from restorative teaching. Orthodontic teaching focussed on the timing of first permanent molar extractions. Paediatric teams were mainly responsible for assessment. Risk factors, differential diagnoses for MIH and defining clinical features were more likely to be assessed by paediatric teams than by others (p = .006). All specialities reported that students were prepared to manage MIH.

CONCLUSION

Molar incisor hypomineralisation is primarily taught and assessed by paediatric teams. No evidence of multidisciplinary or transitional teaching/assessment existed between specialities. Developing robust guidance regarding MIH learning in the UK undergraduate curricula may help improve consistency.

Qualitative study exploring general dental practitioners' views of MIH and its management in the UK and Australia

BACKGROUND

Molar-incisor hypomineralisation (MIH) is a prevalent condition, and how it is managed varies greatly between professional groups.

AIM

To explore, and compare, the UK and Australian general dental practitioners' management of MIH in children.

DESIGN

Face-to-face (remote) semistructured interviews were undertaken, using country-specific topic guides. Participants were purposively sampled and recruited through national conferences and research networks (eviDent Foundation and Northern Dental Practice Based Research Network). Interviews (from each country) were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and independently analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Two major themes arose from the UK interviews: (i) decision-making complexities and understanding of treatment options and (ii) need for specialist input. The main Australian themes were (i) multidisciplinary approach to management supporting decision-making complexities and (ii) economic implications for care. Several difficulties, such as financial implications, multidisciplinary care and clinical decision-making, were identified as barriers to effectively managing MIH by GDPs in primary care.

CONCLUSION

There are similarities and differences in the knowledge and management of MIH amongst UK and Australian nonspecialists. The different healthcare systems played a significant role in shaping how GDPs manage MIH with barriers relating to affordability, multidisciplinary care and clinical decision-making.