Undergraduate orthodontic & paediatric dentistry education in Europe--the DentEd project

How do general dental practitioners perceive and deal with orthodontic bonded retainers?

INTRODUCTION

Long-term follow-up and management of orthodontic bonded retainers require a strong collaboration between orthodontists and general dental practitioners (GDPs). This study aimed to evaluate if Eastern French GDPs were aware of bonded retainers' complications and side effects and if they were willing to take part in their long-term follow-up.

METHODS

Two-hundred and eighteen randomly selected GDPs were invited to answer an online questionnaire. The initial sections covered their experience and management with bonded retainers. In the final sections, GDPs were asked their opinion on the responsibility for long-term follow-up of patients wearing fixed retainers and on the mutual communication between orthodontists and GDPs. Statistical analysis involved descriptive statistics and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Response rate was 32.6% (n = 71). The vast majority of GDPs were familiar with loose retainers, but only 45.2% were willing to repair them. Respondents offering orthodontic services on a regular basis were more likely to insert retainers and repair loose or broken retainers (P < 0.001). Approximately 18.6% of GDPs were aware of third-order side effects encountered with unintentionally active retainers bonded to all 6 anterior teeth. For 88.8% of GDPs, permanent retention was justified, whereas 90% of the dentists refused to be responsible for long-term supervision of fixed retainers. In addition, 67.1% were interested in further training on orthodontic retention, and 92.9% would appreciate clinical guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge about the harmful side effects of bonded retainers was evaluated as insufficient among surveyed GDPs. Long-term follow-up of patients wearing bonded retainers raises issues that should be addressed globally by enhancing mutual communication, practitioners' education, and patients' involvement.

O-HEALTH-EDU: A scoping review on the reporting of oral health professional education in Europe

INTRODUCTION

The variability in oral health professional education is likely to impact on the management of oral health needs across Europe. This scoping review forms the initial part of a larger EU-funded collaborative Erasmus + project, 'O-Health-Edu'. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate how oral health professional education in Europe is reported.

METHODS

The PRISMA and Arksey & O'Malley methodological frameworks for scoping reviews were used to guide reviewers in answering the research question "How is oral health professional education reported in Europe?". The search strategy encompassed published literature searches, internet searches and further searching of relevant documents from educational organisations, regulators and professional bodies. Once the search strategy was developed, it was sent to key stakeholders for consultation. Sources were reviewed by two authors (JD, JF) and included in the review if they reported on oral health professional education in Europe.

RESULTS

A total of 508 sources were retrieved from all of the searches. A total of 405 sources were excluded as they did not report on the topic of interest, leaving 103 sources that reported on oral health professional education in Europe. Handsearching the references of published sources lead to a further 41 sources being screened, of which, 15 were included. In total, 33 duplications were removed and the final number of included sources was 85. The average year of publication for the included sources was 2007, with sources most commonly published in journals dedicated to dental education. Surveys represented the most common form of reporting. From the data obtained, four broad themes of reporting were evident: dental education at a programme level, dental education at a discipline level, other oral health professional education, and postgraduate education and continuous professional development.

CONCLUSION

The reporting of dental and oral health professional education in Europe is limited. Whilst there are many useful documents that provide guidelines on dental education, there is limited knowledge on how education is implemented and delivered. There is a greater need for comprehensive educationally driven programme-level data on oral health professional education across Europe.