Inequalities in treatment planning for children with intellectual disabilities: A questionnaire study of dentists in Europe. (2nd June 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Camoin, Ariane; Tardieu, Corinne; Dany, Lionel; Saliba‐Serre, Bérengère; Faulks, Denise; Coz, Pierre Le
• Is Part Of: Special care in dentistry. Volume 40:Number 4(2020)
• Page Start: 356
• Page End: 363
• Publication Date: 2020-06-02
• Subjects: oral health -- dental caries -- intellectual disabilities -- clinical decision making -- social discrimination; People with disabilities -- Dental care -- Periodicals; Older people -- Dental care -- Periodicals; Hospital dental service -- Periodicals; Dental Care for Disabled -- Periodicals; Dental Service, Hospital -- Periodicals; Geriatric Dentistry -- Periodicals; 617.60087
• DOI: 10.1111/scd.12482
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0275-1879

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Children with intellectual disabilities experience major inequality in the field of oral health, including a higher number of extracted teeth. The literature explains this difference in terms of higher levels of dental disease but does not mention the possibility of inequality in the treatment options offered these children. Aim: The aim is to investigate whether the same treatment options are offered by practitioners to children with and without intellectual disability in equivalent clinical circumstances. Design: A scenario involving a clinical dental situation was developed, with one varying parameter: the patient described was a child with or without cerebral palsy. Results: One hundred and thirty‐nine dental specialists from France and Europe were recruited. A large number of practitioners (68%) chose the same treatment for both patients, but 32% declared modifying the dental treatment planning in the case of the child with cerebral palsy. The most frequently chosen treatment for the scenario of irreversible pulpitis for the child without disability was conservative endodontic treatment (73%) whereas the most frequently chosen treatment for the child with intellectual disability was tooth extraction (54%). Discussion: These results are discussed in terms of beneficence, fear of restorative failure, lack of guidelines, practitioner experience and the implications for equity in healthcare.