↓ Skip to main content

Use of general anaesthesia in paediatric dentistry: barriers to discriminate between true and false cases

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Use of general anaesthesia in paediatric dentistry: barriers to discriminate between true and false cases
Published in
European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40368-015-0211-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. A. Aminabadi, E. Najafpour, S. Aghaee, A. Sighari Deljavan, Z. Jamali, S. Shirazi

Abstract

The use of general anaesthesia (GA) has shown significant increase in child dental patients. This study aimed to assess whether behaviour management strategies can be the effective methods for decreasing the need for GA and its over-utilisation in paediatric dentistry. The patients (n = 240) aged 3-6 years old were selected from referrals by paediatric dentists (PD) or general dentists (GD) for dental treatment under GA. Each child's behaviour during first and subsequent appointments was assessed using the Frankl Behaviour Rating Scale. A first visit included clinical examination and fluoride therapy. In all sessions, a hierarchy of anxiety-reducing behaviour guidance strategies was implemented over nine steps in a logical treatment order. Overall, 47.5 % of children referred for dental treatments under GA were retrained to be treated routinely. False referrals were significantly higher in GD compared to PD group. 80.0 % of the referred children by PD and 6.7 % of those referred by GD were true GA cases and still needed GA. 20.1 % of retrained children and 67.4 % of true GA cases received conscious sedation. There was no significant change in the frequency of children considered uncooperative as the years of experience increased among GD, while this value was significant for PD. The findings may highlight the importance of using behaviour management techniques thoroughly prior to referring an uncooperative child for treatment under GA, and may discourage its over-utilisation. Specifically, these skill sets and their efficient practice should be improved among general dentists.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Researcher 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 19 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Unspecified 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 18 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2016.
All research outputs
#15,350,522
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry
#154
of 281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,276
of 386,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 281 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 386,452 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.