Advanced Education Program in Prosthodontics, Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Illinois, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
J Prosthodont. 2011 Oct;20(7):593-600. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00733.x. Epub 2011 Sep 1.
A survey study of program directors in Advanced Education Programs in Prosthodontics (AEPPs) was conducted to determine the barriers to and factors that can lead to an enhanced patient-centered recall system.
Surveys were sent to AEPP directors across the United States to assess their program's recall protocol. This survey first identified whether an active recall program existed. Based on the existence of recall, the survey then delved into benefits of recall systems for patients and residents, barriers to the formation of a successful recall system, and factors that can be improved upon for an enhanced recall system.
Thirty-two of the 45 programs responded; however, only 28 of the surveys were completed entirely, giving a response rate of 62%. Of these 32 programs, 19 (59.4%) reported having a recall system. A majority of the AEPPs with recall (87.5%) indicated that their system can be further improved. Almost all of the programs without recall (91.7%) indicated that if solutions to the most common barriers to recall were found, they would like to implement one within their program. Some hindrances faced by all programs included budget for initiating and maintaining a recall system, personnel to perform hygiene, a patient tracking system, patient education, and time allocation in the residents' curriculum. Mann-Whitney analyses indicated no statistically significant difference in each factor between programs with and without a recall system. Power analysis suggested that differences in perceived barriers between programs with and without recall systems may have been found if the response rate was 71% or greater. Necessary budget and facilities for initiating or maintaining a recall system may be the greatest difference in barrier importance between programs with and without recall.
Prosthodontic program directors perceived their program's recall system could be improved. If solutions to the most common hindrances were found, almost all program directors desired to establish a recall system within their AEPP. Therefore, a pilot recall system could be valuable in identifying these solutions in establishing an effective recall system for prosthodontic programs within the context of patient health promotion, program curriculum, and financial ramifications.
对高级教育计划中修复学项目主任进行了一项调查研究，以确定阻碍和促进以患者为中心的召回系统的因素。
向美国各地的 AEPP 主任发送了调查，以评估其计划的召回协议。该调查首先确定是否存在主动召回计划。基于召回的存在，调查深入探讨了召回系统对患者和居民的益处、建立成功召回系统的障碍，以及可以改进以增强召回系统的因素。
32 个项目中的 45 个做出了回应；然而，只有 28 个完成了完整的调查，回应率为 62%。在这 32 个项目中，19 个（59.4%）报告说有召回系统。大多数有召回的 AEPP（87.5%）表示他们的系统可以进一步改进。几乎所有没有召回的项目（91.7%）表示，如果找到解决召回最常见障碍的方法，他们将愿意在其项目中实施一个召回系统。所有项目都面临一些障碍，包括启动和维持召回系统的预算、执行卫生保健的人员、患者跟踪系统、患者教育以及居民课程的时间分配。Mann-Whitney 分析表明，在有和没有召回系统的项目之间，每个因素都没有统计学上的显著差异。功效分析表明，如果回应率达到 71%或更高，那么在有和没有召回系统的项目之间，对感知障碍的差异可能会被发现。启动或维持召回系统所需的预算和设施可能是有和没有召回系统的项目之间在障碍重要性方面的最大差异。
修复学项目主任认为他们项目的召回系统可以改进。如果找到解决最常见障碍的方法，几乎所有的项目主任都希望在他们的 AEPP 中建立一个召回系统。因此，在为修复学项目建立一个有效的召回系统方面，一个试点召回系统可以在确定这些解决方案方面具有价值，包括在患者健康促进、项目课程和财务影响方面。
