Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté

Attention, ce site est en cours de développement !
Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts.
Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.
***** Acces problem to record *****\

Identifieur interne : 0022500 ( Pmc/Corpus ); précédent : 0022499; suivant : 0022501 ***** probable Xml problem with record *****

Links to Exploration step


Le document en format XML

<record>
<TEI>
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title xml:lang="en">Are patients referred for NHS-funded dental implant treatment being selected in accordance with national guidelines and subsequently funded by their primary care trust?</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Andrews, Karen V" sort="Andrews, Karen V" uniqKey="Andrews K" first="Karen V" last="Andrews">Karen V. Andrews</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Penny, Jonathan R" sort="Penny, Jonathan R" uniqKey="Penny J" first="Jonathan R" last="Penny">Jonathan R. Penny</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="King, Paul A" sort="King, Paul A" uniqKey="King P" first="Paul A" last="King">Paul A. King</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno>
<idno type="pmid">20522291</idno>
<idno type="pmc">3182796</idno>
<idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182796</idno>
<idno type="RBID">PMC:3182796</idno>
<idno type="doi">10.1308/003588410X12664192076016</idno>
<date when="2010">2010</date>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">002250</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PMC">002250</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<biblStruct>
<analytic>
<title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">Are patients referred for NHS-funded dental implant treatment being selected in accordance with national guidelines and subsequently funded by their primary care trust?</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Andrews, Karen V" sort="Andrews, Karen V" uniqKey="Andrews K" first="Karen V" last="Andrews">Karen V. Andrews</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Penny, Jonathan R" sort="Penny, Jonathan R" uniqKey="Penny J" first="Jonathan R" last="Penny">Jonathan R. Penny</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="King, Paul A" sort="King, Paul A" uniqKey="King P" first="Paul A" last="King">Paul A. King</name>
</author>
</analytic>
<series>
<title level="j">Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0035-8843</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1478-7083</idno>
<imprint>
<date when="2010">2010</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc>
<textClass></textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front>
<div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">
<sec>
<title>INTRODUCTION</title>
<p>The Faculty of Dental Surgery, The Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSE), published a national guideline document in 1997 detailing specific selection criteria for National Health Service (NHS) funded dental implant treatment. The aim of this audit was to assess whether patients selected for NHS-funded dental implants at Bristol Dental Hospital (BDH) met the RCSE national criteria for treatment and received funding from their primary care trust (PCT).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>PATIENTS AND METHODS</title>
<p>A retrospective audit over a period of 2 years was undertaken using medical records and an existing Microsoft Excel database. All patients who had an application submitted to their local PCT for NHS-funded dental implants by BDH were included in this audit.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>RESULTS</title>
<p>A total of 82 applications for dental implant funding were made by BDH and 100% met the RCSE criteria. Fifty-one patients (62.2%) in total had their application for funding approved. Thirty-one patients (37.8%) that met the RCSE guidelines for NHS-funded dental implant treatment had their applications refused. Twenty-five (49%) out of 51 cases in the partially dentate category and six (27.3%) cases in the edentulous group were unsuccessful in their application for NHS-funded dental implants. However, all applications for patients with acquired maxillofacial defects were successful.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>CONCLUSIONS</title>
<p>Patient selection by the BDH for NHS-funded implants complied with the RCSE guidelines. However, there was significant variation in funding between PCTs for those patients who apparently fulfilled the RCSE guidelines. NHS resources are not being allocated equitably for dental implant ‘high-priority’ patients and it would appear that a so-called ‘postcode lottery’ exists between PCTs.</p>
</sec>
</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<pmc article-type="research-article">
<pmc-comment>The publisher of this article does not allow downloading of the full text in XML form.</pmc-comment>
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Ann R Coll Surg Engl</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">rcse</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England</journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="ppub">0035-8843</issn>
<issn pub-type="epub">1478-7083</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>The Royal College of Surgeons of England</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="pmid">20522291</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="pmc">3182796</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1308/003588410X12664192076016</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Dental Surgery</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Are patients referred for NHS-funded dental implant treatment being selected in accordance with national guidelines and subsequently funded by their primary care trust?</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Andrews</surname>
<given-names>Karen V</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Penny</surname>
<given-names>Jonathan R</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>King</surname>
<given-names>Paul A</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
<aff>
<institution>Department of Restorative Dentistry, Bristol Dental Hospital and School</institution>
<addr-line>Bristol, UK</addr-line>
</aff>
</contrib-group>
<author-notes>
<corresp>
<bold>CORRESPONDENCE TO Karen V Andrews</bold>
, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Bristol Dental Hospital and School, Lower Maudlin Street, Bristol BS1 2LY, UK E:
<email>Karen.Andrews@UHBristol.nhs.uk</email>
</corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>01</day>
<month>6</month>
<year>2010</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="ppub">
<month>9</month>
<year>2010</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>92</volume>
<issue>6</issue>
<fpage>512</fpage>
<lpage>514</lpage>
<history>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>17</day>
<month>3</month>
<year>2010</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright © 2010 by the Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2010</copyright-year>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<sec>
<title>INTRODUCTION</title>
<p>The Faculty of Dental Surgery, The Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSE), published a national guideline document in 1997 detailing specific selection criteria for National Health Service (NHS) funded dental implant treatment. The aim of this audit was to assess whether patients selected for NHS-funded dental implants at Bristol Dental Hospital (BDH) met the RCSE national criteria for treatment and received funding from their primary care trust (PCT).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>PATIENTS AND METHODS</title>
<p>A retrospective audit over a period of 2 years was undertaken using medical records and an existing Microsoft Excel database. All patients who had an application submitted to their local PCT for NHS-funded dental implants by BDH were included in this audit.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>RESULTS</title>
<p>A total of 82 applications for dental implant funding were made by BDH and 100% met the RCSE criteria. Fifty-one patients (62.2%) in total had their application for funding approved. Thirty-one patients (37.8%) that met the RCSE guidelines for NHS-funded dental implant treatment had their applications refused. Twenty-five (49%) out of 51 cases in the partially dentate category and six (27.3%) cases in the edentulous group were unsuccessful in their application for NHS-funded dental implants. However, all applications for patients with acquired maxillofacial defects were successful.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>CONCLUSIONS</title>
<p>Patient selection by the BDH for NHS-funded implants complied with the RCSE guidelines. However, there was significant variation in funding between PCTs for those patients who apparently fulfilled the RCSE guidelines. NHS resources are not being allocated equitably for dental implant ‘high-priority’ patients and it would appear that a so-called ‘postcode lottery’ exists between PCTs.</p>
</sec>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>Dental implants</kwd>
<kwd>Health resources</kwd>
<kwd>Guideline</kwd>
<kwd>Clinical audit</kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front>
</pmc>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Pmc/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 0022500 | SxmlIndent | more

Ou

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 0022500 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Santé
   |area=    EdenteV2
   |flux=    Pmc
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     
   |texte=   
}}

Wicri

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32.
Data generation: Thu Nov 30 15:26:48 2017. Site generation: Tue Mar 8 16:36:20 2022