Determining the optimal model for role substitution in NHS dental services in the UK: a mixed-methods study

Background

Maximising health gain for a given level and mix of resources is an ethical imperative for health-service planners. Approximately half of all patients who attend a regular NHS dental check-up do not require any further treatment, whereas many in the population do not regularly attend. Thus, the most expensive resource (the dentist) is seeing healthy patients at a time when many of those with disease do not access care. Role substitution in NHS dentistry, where other members of the dental team undertake the clinical tasks previously provided by dentists, has the potential to increase efficiency and the capacity to care and lower costs. However, no studies have empirically investigated the efficiency of NHS dental provision that makes use of role substitution.

Research questions

This programme of research sought to address three research questions: (1) what is the efficiency of NHS dental teams that make use of role substitution?; (2) what are the barriers to, and facilitators of, role substitution in NHS dental practices?; and (3) how do incentives in the remuneration systems influence the organisation of these inputs and production of outputs in the NHS?

Design

Data envelopment analysis was used to develop a productive efficiency frontier for participating NHS practices, which were then compared on a relative basis, after controlling for patient and practice characteristics. External validity was tested using stochastic frontier modelling, while semistructured interviews explored the views of participating dental teams and their patients to role substitution.

Setting

NHS ‘high-street’ general dental practices.

Participants

121 practices across the north of England.

Interventions

No active interventions were undertaken.

Main outcome measures

Relative efficiency of participating NHS practices, alongside a detailed narrative of their views about role substitution dentistry. Social acceptability for patients.

Results

The utilisation of non-dentist roles in NHS practices was relatively low, the most common role type being the dental hygienist. Increasing the number of non-dentist team members reduced efficiency. However, it was not possible to determine the relative efficiency of individual team members, as the NHS contracts only with dentists. Financial incentives in the NHS dental contract and the views of practice principals (i.e. senior staff members) were equally important. Bespoke payment and referral systems were required to make role substitution economically viable. Many non-dentist team members were not being used to their full scope of practice and constraints on their ability to prescribe reduced efficiency further. Many non-dentist team members experienced a precarious existence, commonly being employed at multiple practices. Patients had a low level of awareness of the different non-dentist roles in a dental team. Many exhibited an inherent trust in the professional ‘system’, but prior experience of role substitution was important for social acceptability.

Conclusions

Better alignment between the financial incentives within the NHS dental contract and the use of role substitution is required, although professional acceptability remains critical.

Study limitations

Output data collected did not reflect the quality of care provided by the dental team and the input data were self-reported.

Future work

Further work is required to improve the evidence base for the use of role substitution in NHS dentistry, exploring the effects and costs of provision.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Dental therapists/hygienists working in remote-rural primary care: a structured review of effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, acceptability and affordability

AIM

To examine the use of dental therapist/hygienists to provide primary dental treatment in remote-rural areas with regard to their effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, acceptability and costs (affordability).

METHOD

The structured literature review of studies indexed in Medline, Embase and CinAHL was conducted using search terms relevant to 'dental therapists' and 'remote-rural'. Remote-rural was defined as 'those (individuals) with a greater than 30-minute drive time to the nearest settlement with a population of greater than 10,000'.

RESULTS

From 1,175 publications screened, 21 studies from 19 publications were initially included. Only seven studies were included that explicitly focused on remote-rural areas. Four were surveys and three were qualitative studies. All of the included studies were reported within the last 7 years. The methodological quality of the surveys varied, particularly with regard to their response rates. All three of the qualitative studies were assessed as potentially weak methodologies. Regarding the research question, none of the studies included provided data relevant to understanding efficiency, cost issues or the acceptability of dental therapists. The available empirical evidence contained only indirect indicators about the sustainability of dental therapy in rural areas.

CONCLUSIONS

The available data indicates that dental therapist/hygienists have suitable skills and could constitute a valuable asset to meet the dental demands in remote-rural areas. However, the evidence base is limited and of a poor quality. There is a need to put in place 'well-designed interventions with robust evaluation to examine cost-effectiveness and benefits to patients and the health workforce'.

UK dental laboratory technicians' views on the efficacy and teaching of clinical-laboratory communication

BACKGROUND

The General Dental Council states that 'good dental care is delivered by a team' and restorative treatment is enhanced by communication between team members. Commercial dental laboratories are ideally placed to comment on effective communication.

AIMS OF THE STUDY

To investigate contemporary attitudes and communication between dentist and dental technician from the technician's perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight hundred and three dental laboratories were invited to take part in a postal survey covering dentist/laboratory communication and the dentist's understanding of technical procedures.

RESULTS

Forty percent of laboratories responded. Only 9% scored communication as very good, 48% scored communication with newly qualified dentists better than with established dentists but only 26% considered that dental students were taught to communicate with dental laboratories effectively. The free comments that the respondents were invited to make identified three distinct themes, 'recognition within the dental team', 'effective communication between dentist and dental technician' and 'dentists lack of technical knowledge'.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective communication between dentist and dental technician is often poor. It was the view of the dental technicians who responded that newly qualified dentists do not have an appropriate understanding of technical techniques. Dental schools are still not preparing new graduates to communicate effectively with dental laboratories.