牙科学生和专业人员对儿童行为管理技术的接受程度:系统回顾。

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Fabíola Fontes Galdino, Cristiane Baccin Bendo, Tatiana Kelly da Silva Fidalgo
{"title":"牙科学生和专业人员对儿童行为管理技术的接受程度:系统回顾。","authors":"Fabíola Fontes Galdino,&nbsp;Cristiane Baccin Bendo,&nbsp;Tatiana Kelly da Silva Fidalgo","doi":"10.1111/eje.13016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>During child dental treatment, different behavior management techniques (BMTs) are applied and it is important to understand the possible discomfort in the operator.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The present systematic review aimed to evaluate the acceptability of dental students and professionals concerning BMTs applied with paediatric dentistry patients.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A systematic search was conducted, following the PEOS strategy: Population (P) – dental students/professionals (S); Exposure (E) – BMTs preconized by the American Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, Outcome (O) – proportion of BMT acceptance; and Study design (S) – observational studies based on data from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, <i>BVS (Lilacs/BBO)</i>, Cochrane, and Open Grey databases up to September 2021. The eligible studies were submitted to data extraction and to the evaluation of methodological quality, using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. The certainty of evidence was evaluated by GRADE.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The search retrieved 710 articles; a total of 21 fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were used for qualitative analysis. Among the undergraduate students and dentists, the most accepted techniques were tell-show-do and positive reinforcement, while paediatric dentists preferred the tell-show-do technique and dental professionals with graduate degrees preferred sedation using nitrous oxide and positive reinforcement. The least accepted technique was protective stabilization. Seven students presented a low risk for bias, while 14 presented a high risk. The certainty of evidence was classified as very low.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Although the basis of available certainty of evidence is scarce and with a considerable risk for bias, it is still possible to conclude that the more accepted techniques were based on communication.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50488,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Dental Education","volume":"28 3","pages":"840-856"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptability of dental students and professionals concerning child behaviour management techniques: Systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Fabíola Fontes Galdino,&nbsp;Cristiane Baccin Bendo,&nbsp;Tatiana Kelly da Silva Fidalgo\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/eje.13016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>During child dental treatment, different behavior management techniques (BMTs) are applied and it is important to understand the possible discomfort in the operator.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>The present systematic review aimed to evaluate the acceptability of dental students and professionals concerning BMTs applied with paediatric dentistry patients.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A systematic search was conducted, following the PEOS strategy: Population (P) – dental students/professionals (S); Exposure (E) – BMTs preconized by the American Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, Outcome (O) – proportion of BMT acceptance; and Study design (S) – observational studies based on data from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, <i>BVS (Lilacs/BBO)</i>, Cochrane, and Open Grey databases up to September 2021. The eligible studies were submitted to data extraction and to the evaluation of methodological quality, using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. The certainty of evidence was evaluated by GRADE.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The search retrieved 710 articles; a total of 21 fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were used for qualitative analysis. Among the undergraduate students and dentists, the most accepted techniques were tell-show-do and positive reinforcement, while paediatric dentists preferred the tell-show-do technique and dental professionals with graduate degrees preferred sedation using nitrous oxide and positive reinforcement. The least accepted technique was protective stabilization. Seven students presented a low risk for bias, while 14 presented a high risk. The certainty of evidence was classified as very low.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Although the basis of available certainty of evidence is scarce and with a considerable risk for bias, it is still possible to conclude that the more accepted techniques were based on communication.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Dental Education\",\"volume\":\"28 3\",\"pages\":\"840-856\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Dental Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eje.13016\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Dental Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eje.13016","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:在儿童牙科治疗过程中,会使用不同的行为管理技术(BMT),了解操作者可能出现的不适非常重要:本系统综述旨在评估牙科学生和专业人员对儿童牙科患者应用行为管理技术的可接受性:材料和方法:按照 PEOS 战略进行了系统检索:人群(P)--牙科学生/专业人员(S);暴露(E)--美国儿童牙科学院预设的BMT,结果(O)--接受BMT的比例;研究设计(S)--基于PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、BVS (Lilacs/BBO)、Cochrane和Open Grey数据库中截至2021年9月的数据的观察性研究。对符合条件的研究进行了数据提取,并使用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所的批判性评估工具(Critical Appraisal Tool)对研究方法的质量进行了评估。通过 GRADE 对证据的确定性进行评估:搜索共检索到 710 篇文章,其中 21 篇符合资格标准,并被用于定性分析。在本科生和牙科医生中,最被接受的技术是 "告诉-演示-做 "和 "积极强化",而儿童牙科医生更喜欢 "告诉-演示-做 "技术,拥有研究生学位的牙科专业人员更喜欢使用一氧化二氮和积极强化的镇静技术。最不被接受的技术是保护性稳定。7名学生存在低偏倚风险,14名学生存在高偏倚风险。证据的确定性被归类为非常低:尽管现有证据的确定性很低,而且存在相当大的偏倚风险,但仍可得出结论,即较多人接受的技术是基于沟通的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Acceptability of dental students and professionals concerning child behaviour management techniques: Systematic review

Introduction

During child dental treatment, different behavior management techniques (BMTs) are applied and it is important to understand the possible discomfort in the operator.

Objective

The present systematic review aimed to evaluate the acceptability of dental students and professionals concerning BMTs applied with paediatric dentistry patients.

Materials and Methods

A systematic search was conducted, following the PEOS strategy: Population (P) – dental students/professionals (S); Exposure (E) – BMTs preconized by the American Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, Outcome (O) – proportion of BMT acceptance; and Study design (S) – observational studies based on data from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, BVS (Lilacs/BBO), Cochrane, and Open Grey databases up to September 2021. The eligible studies were submitted to data extraction and to the evaluation of methodological quality, using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. The certainty of evidence was evaluated by GRADE.

Results

The search retrieved 710 articles; a total of 21 fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were used for qualitative analysis. Among the undergraduate students and dentists, the most accepted techniques were tell-show-do and positive reinforcement, while paediatric dentists preferred the tell-show-do technique and dental professionals with graduate degrees preferred sedation using nitrous oxide and positive reinforcement. The least accepted technique was protective stabilization. Seven students presented a low risk for bias, while 14 presented a high risk. The certainty of evidence was classified as very low.

Conclusion

Although the basis of available certainty of evidence is scarce and with a considerable risk for bias, it is still possible to conclude that the more accepted techniques were based on communication.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of the European Journal of Dental Education is to publish original topical and review articles of the highest quality in the field of Dental Education. The Journal seeks to disseminate widely the latest information on curriculum development teaching methodologies assessment techniques and quality assurance in the fields of dental undergraduate and postgraduate education and dental auxiliary personnel training. The scope includes the dental educational aspects of the basic medical sciences the behavioural sciences the interface with medical education information technology and distance learning and educational audit. Papers embodying the results of high-quality educational research of relevance to dentistry are particularly encouraged as are evidence-based reports of novel and established educational programmes and their outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信