Mangat Ashvin K, Segahran Sumitra, Wei Tan Siew, Nalairndran Geetha, Kanagarajah Anna Rani, Nambiar Phrabhakaran
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, MAHSA University, Bandar Saujana Putra, Malaysia.
Department of Preclinical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, MAHSA University, Bandar Saujana Putra, Malaysia.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2025 May;17(Suppl 1):S531-S534. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1589_24. Epub 2025 Apr 29.
The implementation of a quality management system in healthcare is critical for improving clinical performance. In dentistry, assessing the quality of intraoral periapical (IOPA) radiological reporting is vital for ensuring accurate diagnosis and treatment planning.
This study aimed to evaluate the quality of IOPA radiological reports produced by dental students over the past 5 years in a faculty of dentistry in Malaysia, focusing on completeness and identifying areas for improvement.
A retrospective clinical study was conducted to assess the IOPA reports using predefined radiological criteria. These reports were evaluated for essential factors such as patient information, type of radiograph, justification for the radiograph, and specific findings like resorption, supernumerary teeth, and proximity of roots to anatomical structures.
The audit found that 100% of the reports correctly included details like patient age, radiograph type, and evidence of justification. However, deficiencies were noted in other areas, with a 65% retake rate and complete omission of the ICDAS radiological scoring system (0%).
Despite high accuracy in certain areas, the findings revealed several shortcomings. Further training is required for both undergraduate and postgraduate students, along with yearly audits using a larger sample size to ensure adherence to recommended criteria.
在医疗保健领域实施质量管理体系对于提高临床绩效至关重要。在牙科领域,评估口腔内根尖周(IOPA)放射学报告的质量对于确保准确诊断和治疗计划至关重要。
本研究旨在评估马来西亚一所牙科学院的牙科学生在过去5年中生成的IOPA放射学报告的质量,重点关注完整性并确定改进领域。
进行了一项回顾性临床研究,以使用预定义的放射学标准评估IOPA报告。这些报告针对患者信息、X光片类型、X光片理由以及诸如吸收、多生牙和牙根与解剖结构的接近程度等特定发现等基本因素进行了评估。
审核发现100%的报告正确包含了患者年龄、X光片类型和理由证据等细节。然而,在其他领域发现了不足之处,重拍率为65%,并且完全遗漏了ICDAS放射学评分系统(0%)。
尽管在某些领域准确性较高,但研究结果揭示了一些缺点。本科生和研究生都需要进一步培训,同时需要使用更大的样本量进行年度审核,以确保遵守推荐标准。