Who accompanies children to a dental hospital appointment?

Abstract

Aim: To determine who accompanies paediatric dental patients to their appointments, in a teaching hospital setting. Study Design: Data were recorded prospectively for children attending the Paediatric Dentistry clinic of the Charles Clifford Dental Hospital, Sheffield, England, over 4 months which included two school holiday periods. The data were recorded on a standardised data collection sheet, which included age and gender of the patient; number/s of accompanying adults and children and their relationship to the patient; the appointment session and appointment type. Results: A total of 394 paediatric dental visits were recorded. Patients were of a mean age of 10 (range 1–17 years). Most visits were for treatment (44.7%) and review (39.8%), with a much smaller proportion being new patient assessments (8.9%) and emergency appointments (6.6%). The numbers of afternoon and morning sessions recorded were approximately similar and 35% of the visits were recorded in a school holiday day. The majority of patients attended with at least one parent (91.6%). A parent was most likely to attend a new patient assessment (97.1%) or review visit (94.3%). Parental presence was less likely for treatment (89%) and least likely for emergency visits (84%). Most patients attended with their mother (62.1 %). Patients were less frequently accompanied by parents (13.1%), their father (12.1%) and one or both grandparents (4.3%). Smaller proportions were accompanied by older siblings, a step parent, other relatives or foster carers. Two patients attended unaccompanied. The time of day, or whether it was a school holiday period or not, did not influence parental presence or the numbers of adults accompanying patients. However the additional presence of other children (non patients) was more likely on morning sessions and during school holidays. Statistics: One way analysis of variance (ANOVA), an independent sample t-test or chi-squared tests were undertaken as appropriate to determine whether there were any significant differences in parental or child accompaniment according to the patient’s age; gender; type of appointment or time of appointment. Significance levels were set at P<0.05. Conclusions: It was of concern that a parent was least likely to accompany a child for an emergency visit when a history and consent may assume the greatest importance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, Council on Clinical Affairs. Guideline on record-keeping. Pediatr Dent 2005–2006; 27(7 reference manual): 176–181.

  2. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, Council on Clinical Affairs. Clinical guideline on informed consent. Pediatr Dent 2006; 28(suppl): 198–199.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Crossley ML, Joshi G. An investigation of paediatric dentists attitudes towards parental accompaniment and behavioural management techniques in the UK. Br Dent J 2002; 192(9): 517–521.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Crowley E, Whelton H, O’Mullane, et al. Parents preference as to whether they would like to accompany their child when receiving dental treatment-results from a national survey. J Ir Dent Assoc 2005; 51(1): 23–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Crowley E, Whelton H, O’Mullane, et al. Parents preference as to whether they would like to accompany their child when receiving dental treatment-results from a national survey. J Ir Dent Assoc 2005; 51(1): 23–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dept of Health UK. Seeking consent: working with children. HMSO, London, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Diamond B. Legal aspects of consent 8: children under the age of 16 years. Br Nurs J 2001; 10(12): 797–799.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fenlon WL, Dabbs AR, Curzon MEJ. Parental presence during treatment of the child patient. Br Dent J 1993; 174:23–28

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kain ZN, Fernandez LA, Touloukian RJ. Parental presence during induction of anaesthesia: the surgeon’s perspective. Eur J Pediatr Surg 1996a; 6(6): 323–327.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kain ZN, Ferris CA, Mayes LC, Rimar S. Parental presence during induction of anaesthesia: practice differences between the United States and Great Britain. Paediatr Anaesth 1996b; 6(3): 187–193.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Klein H. Psychological effects of dental treatment on children of different ages. J Dent Child 1967; 34(1): 30–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kurz R, Gill D, Mjones S. Ethical issues in the daily medical care of children. EurJ Paediatr 2005. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-005-0002-2.

  13. Marzo G, Camanella V, Albani F, Gallusi G. Psychological aspects in paediatric dentistry: parental presence. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2003; 4(4): 177–180.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Moores A, Pace NA. Children’s rights in Europe. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2005; 22: 245–248.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dr P. K. Virdee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Virdee, P.K., Rodd, H.D. Who accompanies children to a dental hospital appointment?. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 8, 96–98 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03262576

Download citation

Key words

  • parental presence
  • accompanying adult
  • paediatric
  • dental appointments