Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 2090781

Quality control, or just control?

Abstract

This article presents an editorial perspective on the dichotomy of state dental association/licensing boards' subjecting out-of-state oral health professionals to clinical board exams, while at the same time pursuing the possible introduction of preceptorship training for dental hygienists. Reciprocity and licensure to perform all functions for which the operator has been educated to competency are appropriate avenues to pursue. If licensing bodies are truly interested in quality control, then preceptorship should not be sought, because it is inconsistent with that goal. From an educational perspective, when dental assistants and dental hygienists are capable of obtaining licensure through this model, apprenticeship programs for dentists are logically the next step. Licensing bodies may then become redundant, and the professionalism of the oral healthcare community brought into question. Issues of reciprocity and preceptorship have nothing to do with quality control--they have to do with the outright control of one profession over another.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F Cotton. 1990. Quality control, or just control?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2090781/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Disseminating evidence from health technology assessment: the case of tobacco prevention.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the present study were to investigate the awareness among dentists and dental hygienists of evidence-based reports and guidelines on tobacco cessation activities and the impact these publications had on clinical practice. METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to dental hygienists and dentists in Stockholm County, Sweden, and the results were compared with a previous investigation. RESULTS: Among the respondents, awareness of a popular science version of a systematic review on smoking and its effect on oral health was reported by 90 percent of the hygienists and 66 percent of the dentists. The information was used in clinical work by 34 percent of the dentists and 54 percent of the hygienists. Reported changes in patterns of practice were more frequent recommendations to use nicotine replacement therapy and a more widespread use of setting quit dates. Approximately one quarter of the dental professionals reported that they had increased tobacco cessation consultation because of the results from the reports. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in patterns of practice were observed after dissemination of evidence-based information on tobacco cessation. Methods that were proven to be effective in the evidence-based report such as discussing quit dates and recommending nicotine replacement therapy were more commonly used after the publication of the report. Short, popular versions of extensive systematic reviews seem to be useful for implementing evidence-based knowledge and changing clinical practice.

Dental Hygienists↗