Teledentistry for screening new patient orthodontic referrals. Part 1: A randomised controlled trial

Key Points Teledentistry for orthodontic referrals has been successfully used by eight GDP practices in Greater Manchester. The benefit to the GDP is availability of specialist orthodontic advice based on clinical photographs +/− radiographs sent via email. The benefit to the patient is that they ma...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British dental journal 2005-11, Vol.199 (10), p.659-662
Hauptverfasser: Mandall, N A, O'Brien, K D, Brady, J, Worthington, H V, Harvey, L
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Key Points Teledentistry for orthodontic referrals has been successfully used by eight GDP practices in Greater Manchester. The benefit to the GDP is availability of specialist orthodontic advice based on clinical photographs +/− radiographs sent via email. The benefit to the patient is that they may be saved a hospital visit if their referral is first assessed via teledentistry. This will be particularly helpful if patients live far from the orthodontic provider. Objective The primary aim was to evaluate the validity of a teledentistry system for screening new patient orthodontic referrals. The secondary aims were to evaluate whether the teledentistry system affected i) referral rates ii) inappropriate referral rates iii) number of failed appointments. Study design Randomised controlled trial. Sample Fifteen dental practices in Greater Manchester, UK, were randomly allocated to either a teledentistry test group (n = 8) or a control group (n = 7). They referred 327 patients over a 15 month period. Method Practitioners in the test group referred patients to one of two consultant orthodontists via a 'store and forward' teledentistry system consisting of photographs sent as email attachments. The decision to accept or not accept a referral on this basis was compared with the same decision choice when the same patient was subsequently seen on a new patient clinic. This measured the validity of the system with the clinic's decision used as the gold standard. Patients in the control group were referred using the usual letter system. Referral rates, inappropriate referrals and number of failed appointments were then compared between the teledentistry and control groups. Results The sensitivity (true positive value) of the teledentistry system was high at 0.80 with a positive predictive value of 0.92. The specificity (true negative value) was slightly lower at 0.73 with a negative predictive value of 0.50. The inappropriate referral rate for the teledentistry group was 8.2% and for the controls 26.2% (p = 0.037). There was no statistically significant difference in clinic attendance between teledentistry and control groups (p = 0.36). Conclusions Teledentistry is a valid system for positively identifying appropriate new patient orthodontic referrals. However, there is a risk that a patient is not accepted on the teledentistry system who would benefit from a full clinical examination. Teledentistry could be a significant factor in reducing the inappropriate referra
ISSN:0007-0610
1476-5373
DOI:10.1038/sj.bdj.4812930