Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Coventry

Publications and source records attributed to P Coventry.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1990

The capitation study. 3. The views of participating dentists and the profession.

During the course of a 3-year parallel, controlled clinical trial comparing a capitation system of remuneration with fee-for-service for the dental care of children, the views of the dentists were gained through meetings, informal communication, and a structured questionnaire sent to every dentist in the study. The questionnaires completed by the dentists who had been in the study from the beginning were used in the analysis. The views of practice principals on practice administration were also gained. Dentists in capitation claimed to have greater clinical freedom than those in fee-for-service, but the system under test involved more practice administration. The trial allowed the two systems to be compared under limited, controlled conditions, thus benefiting any substantive scheme that might be developed from it.

Capitation Fee↗
PubMed1990

The Capitation Study. 2. Does capitation encourage more prevention?

The results of a 3-year parallel, controlled clinical trial comparing a capitation system of payment for the dental care of children with fee-for-service, showed that capitation offered dentists more clinical freedom. Dentists in capitation used this to provide more preventive care, particularly advice to parents on the control of dental disease in their children. In contrast, few fissure sealants were placed and few topical fluoride applications were made under either system. However, parents in both systems were satisfied with the preventive service their children received and were confident of their ability to control their children's dental disease. The effect of this increased preventive activity was not yet apparent within the period of the study.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1990

The capitation study. 1. Does capitation encourage "supervised neglect'?

Four matched pairs of geographically and socially contrasting areas of Britain were randomly allocated within pairs to either a capitation or fee-for-service payment system for the dental care of children in a 3-year clinical trial. Measurements were made on the dental health of randomly selected 5-6 and 14-15-year-old patients and the views of their parents elicited. Patterns of treatment were also gained from the clinical records of randomly selected patients. In addition, the views of the dentists taking part, of the profession's representatives, and of the administrators of the systems were obtained. No evidence of systematic neglect could be found among the children treated under capitation, but they had fewer fillings, more untreated diseased teeth and similar disease levels to their counterparts treated under fee-for-service. Dentists in capitation carried out fewer fillings, fewer extractions, took fewer radiographs and saw their patients less frequently than their fee-for-service colleagues.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1989

The Capitation Study--your questions answered.

In the August 23, 1986 issue of the British Dental Journal, an account of the Capitation Study was published in the form of questions and answers. The study had just commenced and general dental practitioners were interested to learn the reasons for its conduct, who was carrying it out, how it was planned and what eventual effect it might have on dentists' professional lives. Now that the study has ended and the results have been collated and delivered to the Department of Health, readers might wish to be reminded of its aims, conduct and outcome. During the study, many practitioners asked interesting questions, some of which this article will attempt to answer.

Capitation Fee↗
PubMed1989

A trial of a capitation system of payment for the treatment of children in the General Dental Service. Final report. Dental Health Services Research Unit, University of Manchester. September, 1989.

A 3-year clinical trial comparing capitation and fee-for-service remuneration systems for general dental practitioners for the treatment of children has been successfully completed. Capitation dentists restored carious teeth at a later stage in the disease process than fee-for-service controls, and carried out more preventive treatment and advice. However, the disease experience of their patients was little different from that of patients treated under fee-for-service. Capitation dentists saw their patients less frequently and took fewer radiographs than their fee-for-service colleagues. The prevalence of both fissue sealants and arrested caries was low in both groups, as was the prevalence of teeth extracted as a result of caries. Levels of oral cleanliness were similar under both systems. Private treatment was rarely prescribed for children, but was more prevalent for patients of fee-for-service dentists. The profession felt that capitation offered greater clinical freedom and more financial stability to dentists, but a greater temptation to under-prescribe treatment. The profession lacked commitment to capitation as a method of remuneration for the treatment of children in the General Dental Service. Fee-for-service dentists appeared to be more innovative, expressed a greater allegiance to their patients and felt a greater temptation to over-prescribe than capitation dentists. The parents had a high opinion of the service for children, irrespective of the remuneration system, and the children found the service very acceptable. Parents had a stronger allegiance to the fee-for-service than the capitation dentists. The study revealed several short-comings in the capitation model tested, but solutions to all of these became apparent. A capitation agreement of more than 12 months would simplify administration and reduce costs, as would a reduction in the number of forms. The need to notify parents when a dentist was replaced in a practice created considerable difficulties and increased expense. The treatment of trauma and extractions for orthodontic purposes should have been items excluded from the capitation fee. The need for information on dentists' activity in capitation was accepted but should be kept simple and relevant. Monitoring quality of care under capitation can be carried out from the routine data collected for administrative purposes. Capitation does not appear to increase participation. Costs of administering capitation are little different from those for fee-for-service. More resources were spent per dentist and per patient under capitation than fee-for-service. In the clinical trial fee-for-service was more cost-effective than capitation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Adolescent↗