Figure - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Validated set of wait time benchmarks (in days) for access to intervention streams.
Source publication
The objective of this study was to demonstrate face validity with a novel resource allocation framework designed to maximize equity into dental booking systems. The study was carried out in 2014. Eleven experts in primary dental care practice in Southern Brazil participated, using a three-round consensus group technique. First, the experts reached...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... for group activities were defined for a regime of preventive care and health promotion performed by dental hygienists and community health workers, respectively. Table 2 shows the set of validated maximum lengths of time expected for a classified quadrant to remain free of clinical deterioration, while going through the required dental care pathways. ...Citations
... Category 1 corresponds to the lower end of dental needs and longer waiting time for a dentist appointment, while 5 corresponds to the higher needs and shorter waiting time (up to 2 days), i.e., need of emergency dental care. The model was devised, discussed and validated with primary care dentists in 2010 15 . The waiting times with a 90% stability guarantee for classes 1, 2, 3 and 4 were adjusted in 2016 being 365, 365, 180 and 76 days respectively. ...
The aim of this study was to describe the occurrence of dental emergency and its association with individual factors and primary health care services. A follow-up study was conducted with data extracted from an exploratory study about the classification of dental care needs over time according to a care framework. There were included 1831 patients of five services. The outcome was the occurrence of dental emergency analyzed according to sex, age, skin color, service and maximum waiting time for dental care. A multivariate analysis with Poisson regression was used to estimate weighted prevalence ratio (PR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) and survival analysis was conducted. The prevalence of dental emergency was 12.6%, varying according to age (13-19: PRa =1.79 (95%CI: 1.0-3.21); 20-65:PRa = 2.71 (95%CI: 1.73-4.26); Over 65: PRa = 2.51 (95%CI: 1.41-4.46)) and Primary Health Care service (FHS 2: PRa = 2.20 (95%CI: 1.37-3.53),FHS 3: PRa = 1.43 (95%CI: 0.90-2.27); FHS 4: PRa = 3.25 (95%CI: 2.15-4.92),FHS 5: PRa = 2.49 (95%CI: 1.56-3.97)) For 231 cases classified as emergency, the failure rate was 7.4%. For 214 cases of emergency, the non-continuity after appointment rate was 53.7%. The incidence of dental emergency was 8.3% and recurrence was 7.2%. Considering all 262 emergency cases attended, the resolution rate was 93.5% and most cases (n = 252, 96.1%) received care within one day. The results point to high effectiveness in emergency dental care within Primary Health Care services. There are indications of the need for improvements in retention and continuity of care.
