Shared Planning for Improved Patient Experiences

Shared Planning for Improved Patient Experiences

**Desire for Improved Aesthetics**: Many adults seek orthodontic treatment to enhance the appearance of their smile, addressing concerns such as crooked teeth, gaps, or overbites that may have persisted from childhood or developed due to various life factors.

Certainly, let's dive into the heart of enhancing patient experiences, especially within the context of orthodontic treatment for children, through the lens of shared planning. This approach not only transforms the traditional patient-provider dynamic but also ensures that every step of the orthodontic journey is a collaborative effort, focusing on the needs and comfort of the young patients and their families. Here's how shared planning can revolutionize pediatric orthodontic care:




  1. Building Trust from the Start: The foundation of successful shared planning in orthodontics lies in fostering trust between the orthodontist, parents, and the child. Clear aligners are an option for some kids needing orthodontic care Kids' dental alignment services hospital. Early, open discussions about treatment goals, expectations, and potential outcomes help establish a rapport that makes children feel secure and involved in their own care.




  2. Understanding Unique Needs: Each child is unique; therefore, their orthodontic plan should be tailored to their specific dental health needs, growth patterns, and personal preferences. Involving both parents and kids in this assessment ensures that all perspectives are considered, leading to more personalized and effective treatment plans.




  3. Visualizing Success: Utilizing models, simulations, and digital imagery allows everyone involved to visualize proposed treatments and outcomes. This visual aid not only helps children understand what to expect but also gives parents peace of mind by making abstract concepts concrete and tangible.




  4. Inclusive Decision-Making: Shared planning encourages active participation from all stakeholders-children, parents, and orthodontists-in decision-making processes regarding treatment options and timelines. This inclusive approach empowers families to voice concerns or preferences at every stage, ensuring alignment with family values and priorities.




  5. Education as a Partnership: Educating families about orthodontic conditions and treatments is crucial for informed decision-making. A collaborative approach means providing clear explanations tailored to each family's level of understanding-explaining why certain procedures are recommended and how they contribute to long-term oral health benefits for kids.




  6. Supporting Emotional Well-being: Orthodontic treatment can sometimes affect a child's emotional state due to changes in appearance or discomfort during adjustments. Shared planning includes discussing strategies for managing these emotional challenges together with psychologists or counselors if necessary, ensuring holistic support throughout the treatment journey.




  7. Regular Feedback Loops: Establishing regular check-ins where feedback is welcomed from both parents and patients creates an environment where concerns can be addressed promptly. This continuous dialogue ensures that any issues are nipped in the bud while reinforcing that everyone's voice matters in shaping the treatment experience positively.




  8. Celebrating Milestones Together: Lastly, recognizing achievements along the way-be it completing a phase of treatment or seeing improvements in dental alignment-strengthens relationships between providers and families while motivating children through positive reinforcement techniques that celebrate their hard work and progress together as a team.




By embracing shared planning in pediatric orthodontics, we shift from a one-dimensional provider-centric model towards a collaborative approach that values input from everyone involved-ultimately enhancing patient experiences by making them feel heard, understood, and actively engaged throughout their orthodontic journey toward healthier smiles and improved confidence

Shared planning in pediatric orthodontics represents a collaborative approach that fundamentally alters the landscape of patient care, focusing on enhancing experiences for both children and their families. This model is rooted in the belief that treating young patients isn't just about correcting dental alignment; it's about creating a comprehensive, family-centered experience that considers emotional, psychological, and developmental aspects alongside the physical treatment needs.


At its core, shared planning involves a close collaboration between various specialists-pediatric dentists, orthodontists, pediatricians, and sometimes even psychologists or child life specialists-to craft a unified treatment plan tailored specifically to each child's unique needs. This multidisciplinary team gathers insights from multiple perspectives to ensure that every aspect of the child's oral health journey is considered. For instance, while an orthodontist might focus on the technical aspects of aligning teeth and correcting bites, a pediatrician could offer crucial insights into how the child's overall health might impact or be impacted by orthodontic treatment.


This approach fosters an environment where communication is paramount. Regular meetings among the care team members ensure everyone is on the same page regarding treatment progress, potential challenges, and adjustments needed along the way. More importantly, it empowers parents and guardians by involving them actively in discussions about their child's care. This inclusivity not only helps in setting realistic expectations but also encourages a sense of partnership where families feel heard and valued-a vital component for reducing anxiety often associated with orthodontic treatments in children.


Shared planning also emphasizes the significance of creating positive experiences throughout a child's treatment journey. By considering factors like fear or discomfort related to dental visits, teams can implement strategies such as using child-friendly language, incorporating playful elements into appointments (like themed waiting rooms or fun rewards for cooperation), and employing gentle techniques to make procedures as comfortable as possible. These small yet impactful gestures contribute significantly to building trust between the child and their healthcare providers, making future visits less daunting.


Moreover, this collaborative approach allows for flexibility in adapting treatment plans as children grow and develop-not just physically but emotionally too. It acknowledges that each child's experience with orthodontic care is unique and may require adjustments over time based on their responses to treatment and evolving personal needs. By maintaining open lines of communication among all parties involved-including regular updates to parents-this ensures that any deviations from the plan are addressed promptly and effectively.


In essence, shared planning in pediatric orthodontics transforms what could be a stressful experience for children into an adventure marked by understanding support systems-where every member of the care team plays an integral role in ensuring not just successful outcomes but enjoyable ones too. This model underscores that effective patient care transcends clinical expertise; it thrives on empathy, collaboration, and a genuine commitment to improving every aspect of a young patient's experience from start to finish. As we continue to refine these practices, we pave the way for generations of children who view dental care not with apprehension but with confidence-and perhaps even excitement-for what it can bring them: healthier smiles and brighter futures filled with possibilities beyond just straight teeth but confident interactions in life itself.

**Enhancing Oral Health**: Proper alignment of teeth through orthodontic treatment can improve oral hygiene by making it easier to clean teeth effectively, thereby reducing the risk of cavities and gum disease that may have been challenging to manage in misaligned dentitions.

Shared Planning for Improved Patient Experiences: A Beacon of Patient-Centered Care


In the evolving landscape of healthcare, the shift towards patient-centered care has become not just a trend but a fundamental necessity. At the heart of this transformation lies the practice of shared planning, an essential component that significantly enhances patient experiences by placing the patient at the very center of their own care journey. This approach doesn't merely represent a change in how care is delivered; it signifies a profound respect for the individuality, preferences, and needs of each patient, fostering an environment where they are active participants rather than passive recipients of medical interventions.


The importance of shared planning in enhancing patient-centered care cannot be overstated. By engaging patients in the planning process from the outset, healthcare providers acknowledge and validate their unique perspectives and goals. This collaborative approach ensures that treatment plans align closely with what matters most to the patient-be it recovery time, minimizing side effects, or maintaining quality of life during treatment. It's about crafting a roadmap that reflects not just medical necessities but personal values and lifestyle considerations, thus making the entire experience feel more tailored and less impersonal.


Shared planning empowers patients with knowledge and involvement, dramatically improving their satisfaction levels. When patients understand their conditions and treatment options clearly, they feel more confident in their decisions, leading to greater adherence to prescribed plans and better health outcomes. This empowerment also extends beyond immediate treatment; it fosters a lasting sense of control over one's health journey, which can positively influence long-term health behaviors and outcomes.


Moreover, shared planning facilitates open communication between healthcare providers and patients-a cornerstone of effective patient-centered care. It encourages dialogue that goes beyond merely discussing symptoms or treatments; it opens channels for understanding fears, hopes, and expectations. This deeper level of engagement builds trust and rapport between patients and their caregivers, creating a supportive partnership aimed at achieving optimal health outcomes together.


Furthermore, incorporating shared planning into healthcare practices promotes efficiency within systems traditionally known for their complexity and fragmentation. By involving patients in decision-making processes early on, potential barriers or misalignments can be identified and addressed proactively. This proactive approach helps streamline care pathways, reduces unnecessary procedures, and ensures resources are utilized effectively-ultimately leading to improved outcomes at both individual and systemic levels.


In essence, shared planning is not just an add-on feature but an integral thread woven into the fabric of patient-centered care that enhances experiences from start to finish. It recognizes each patient as an individual with unique insights into their own health needs while leveraging professional expertise to guide them through complex medical landscapes. As we continue to advance our healthcare systems toward more human-centric models, embracing shared planning will undoubtedly play a pivotal role in realizing healthier individuals within thriving communities-a testament to how thoughtful collaboration can transform lives for the better.

**Addressing Chronic Dental Issues**: Adults may seek orthodontics to resolve long-standing dental problems such as bite issues (overbites, underbites, crossbites) that can lead to jaw pain, headaches, and digestive difficulties if left untreated.

Collaborative approaches in the realm of healthcare, particularly when it comes to shared planning for improved patient experiences, represent a transformative shift from traditional, siloed practices. This method emphasizes teamwork across various healthcare disciplines and with patients themselves, fostering an environment where diverse perspectives converge to enhance care delivery. The benefits of such collaborative efforts are manifold, touching on quality of care, efficiency, patient satisfaction, and even financial outcomes.


Firstly, collaboration significantly enhances the quality of care that patients receive. By bringing together doctors, nurses, therapists, social workers, and other essential healthcare professionals-alongside patients and their families-the planning process becomes comprehensive. Each participant contributes unique insights into the patient's needs and circumstances. This holistic view ensures that treatment plans are not only medically sound but also consider the broader context of a patient's life, including psychological and social factors. Such comprehensive care planning leads to more effective outcomes and a greater likelihood of adherence to treatment regimens.


Moreover, collaborative approaches streamline processes within healthcare settings, leading to improved efficiency. When teams communicate openly and regularly share information about patient progress and needs, duplication of efforts is minimized while critical steps are ensured. This coordination can lead to quicker responses to changes in a patient's condition and smoother transitions between different stages of care or facilities-critical aspects that can significantly affect patient outcomes and satisfaction.


Patient satisfaction stands as another crucial benefit of shared planning initiatives. When patients feel involved in their care plan, they often experience higher levels of satisfaction. Being heard and having their preferences considered cultivates a sense of partnership with their healthcare providers rather than mere passivity as recipients of care. This engagement empowers patients, making them active participants in decisions affecting their health journey-a dynamic that not only boosts morale but also encourages better engagement with treatment plans.


Additionally, collaborative approaches have shown promise in optimizing resource use within healthcare systems, contributing positively to financial sustainability without compromising quality. By ensuring that all angles are covered through collective expertise and by reducing inefficiencies through streamlined communication and processes, these methods help manage costs effectively. This is crucial given the ongoing challenges faced by healthcare systems globally regarding resource allocation and expenditure control.


In essence, embracing collaborative approaches in shared planning for improved patient experiences unlocks a synergy among stakeholders that enriches every aspect of healthcare delivery-from the quality and effectiveness of care to the efficiency of operations and ultimately to enhancing patient satisfaction and well-being. As we navigate the complexities of modern healthcare challenges, this human-centric model proves invaluable in crafting solutions that truly serve those at the heart of our endeavors: the patients themselves.

**Correcting Speech Impediments**: Misaligned teeth or jaw structures can contribute to speech difficulties; orthodontic treatment can correct these issues, improving articulation and overall communication skills.

Shared planning, particularly in the context of orthodontic treatment for children, stands as a pivotal approach to enhancing communication among all stakeholders-parents, children, and orthodontists. This collaborative process isn't merely about scheduling appointments or discussing treatment options; it's a holistic strategy aimed at improving patient experiences by fostering an environment of mutual understanding, respect, and involvement. Let's delve into how shared planning can weave a more cohesive tapestry for everyone involved in the journey toward a healthier smile.


Firstly, shared planning opens up a dialogue that is essential for setting realistic expectations. When parents and orthodontists collaborate to outline treatment goals and timelines, they provide children with a clearer picture of what to expect. This transparency reduces anxiety often associated with dental procedures, especially for children who might fear the unknown. By being included in discussions about potential outcomes and the steps required to achieve them, children feel more engaged and less intimidated by the process. This engagement can lead to better cooperation during treatments, making visits to the orthodontist less stressful for everyone involved.


Moreover, involving parents in the planning stages ensures that their insights are considered crucial components of the treatment plan. Parents often have a deep understanding of their child's personality, habits, and responses to stress or discomfort. Sharing this knowledge with orthodontists allows for personalized care that caters not just to dental needs but also to emotional and psychological well-being. For instance, if a child tends to be particularly anxious about appointments, strategies can be developed collectively-like incorporating distraction techniques or scheduling shorter sessions-to create a more comfortable experience tailored specifically to that child's needs.


Furthermore, shared planning promotes continuous communication channels among all parties. Regular updates on progress can help keep parents informed while allowing them to voice concerns or observations promptly. This ongoing dialogue ensures that any adjustments needed in treatment plans can be made swiftly and effectively without waiting until problems escalate. Such proactive communication helps maintain alignment between home care instructions given by orthodontists and actual practices at home by both parents and children-a critical factor in achieving successful outcomes.


Additionally, when children see their parents actively participating in their care plan discussions, it instills a sense of importance regarding oral health from an early age. Children learn valuable lessons about responsibility and teamwork through witnessing collaborative efforts towards achieving health goals. This learning experience extends beyond orthodontic treatment; it lays down foundational principles of health management that they will carry into adulthood.


In conclusion, shared planning serves as a cornerstone for improved patient experiences within orthodontic care by fostering enhanced communication among parents, children, and orthodontists alike. It transforms what could be perceived as mere medical appointments into cooperative endeavors grounded in mutual respect and understanding. By embracing this approach، we not only refine the mechanics of dental care but significantly elevate the overall experience、 creating happier patients، more satisfied parents، and ultimately، healthier smiles that last a lifetime。

**Preventive Measures Against Tooth Wear**: Properly aligned teeth are less prone to excessive wear and tear; adults may pursue orthodontic treatment to prevent premature tooth degradation and associated costs of restorative dentistry.

Collaboration, especially in the context of healthcare, particularly when focusing on shared planning for improved patient experiences, plays a pivotal role in fostering a supportive environment that significantly reduces anxiety among young patients. This approach isn't merely about involving various stakeholders-it's about weaving a tapestry of support that makes the often intimidating world of medical care feel more approachable and less daunting. Let's unpack how this collaborative spirit transforms the experience for young patients.


First off, collaboration brings together diverse professionals-doctors, nurses, child life specialists, psychologists, and even family members-each contributing their unique perspective and expertise. This multidisciplinary approach ensures that the care plan addresses not just the medical needs but also the emotional and psychological well-being of the patient. For young patients, who might struggle to articulate their fears or anxieties about medical procedures or hospital stays, this comprehensive support system acts as a safety net. Knowing that every aspect of their care is thoughtfully coordinated can instill a sense of security and understanding that they are not alone in this journey.


Moreover, shared planning sessions often include discussions about the patient's preferences, fears, and questions. By actively involving young patients in conversations about their treatment plans, healthcare providers empower them to have a say in their own care. This empowerment is crucial; it transforms the passive role of receiving treatment into an active participation in decision-making processes. When children feel heard and involved, their anxiety diminishes because they gain a sense of control over their situation-a powerful antidote to fear and uncertainty.


Additionally, collaboration encourages an environment where open communication thrives. When healthcare teams regularly meet to discuss patient progress and concerns, it fosters transparency and trust between providers and patients (and their families). Young patients observe this open dialogue and feel more comfortable expressing their own worries or asking questions without fear of judgment. This culture of openness validates their feelings and experiences, making them feel understood and valued as individuals rather than just cases to be managed.


Social support also plays a vital role within this collaborative framework. Involving family members in planning sessions acknowledges the critical role they play in a child's life-and consequently, in their healing process. Families can provide comfort through familiarity; knowing loved ones are actively engaged can significantly ease anxiety for young patients who might otherwise feel isolated or overwhelmed by unfamiliar surroundings and routines.


Lastly, let's consider how collaboration extends beyond immediate medical needs to encompass educational elements tailored for young patients. Interactive workshops or preparatory sessions led by child life specialists can demystify hospital procedures using age-appropriate language and activities. Such initiatives not only educate but also entertain, turning potentially anxiety-provoking scenarios into manageable experiences through playful engagement-a brilliant strategy to normalize what might otherwise seem alienating or scary.


In essence, collaboration within shared planning for improved patient experiences serves as a powerful tool for creating an environment where young patients feel supported rather than overwhelmed by anxiety. It harnesses the collective expertise of various professionals while prioritizing open communication and active participation from both patients and their families. By transforming healthcare from an impersonal service into a collaborative endeavor centered around understanding individual needs and fostering emotional well-being, we can significantly mitigate anxiety-allowing youthful spirits to navigate medical challenges with greater confidence和勇气。

**Facilitating Better Chewing Efficiency**: Orthodontic treatment can improve bite function and alignment, allowing for more efficient chewing which is crucial for digestion and overall nutritional health in adulthood.

Involving children in treatment decisions is a pivotal yet often overlooked aspect of shared planning aimed at improving patient experiences, particularly within pediatric healthcare settings. This approach not only respects the evolving autonomy of children but also enriches the therapeutic process by integrating their perspectives and preferences into care plans. The rationale behind this inclusive strategy is multifaceted, touching on psychological, developmental, and ethical dimensions that underscore its importance in modern healthcare practices.


Firstly, considering the psychological impact, children who are engaged in discussions about their treatment feel a sense of empowerment and control over their health journey. This engagement can significantly mitigate anxiety and fear associated with medical procedures and hospital environments, which are often intimidating for young patients. By explaining treatments in age-appropriate language and involving them in decision-making processes, healthcare providers can alleviate some of the psychological burdens that accompany illness and treatment, fostering a more positive mindset crucial for recovery.


Moreover, from a developmental standpoint, involving children in these discussions aligns with their cognitive growth stages. As children mature, their ability to understand complex information and participate in meaningful dialogue improves. By respecting these developmental milestones and adapting communication accordingly, healthcare professionals not only facilitate better comprehension of health issues but also encourage active participation in their own care. This practice nurtures self-advocacy skills early on-a trait invaluable as they transition into adulthood managing their health independently.


Ethically speaking, the principle of respect for persons underpins the justification for involving children in treatment decisions. This principle emphasizes dignity and autonomy, suggesting that individuals capable of making informed choices should have a say in matters affecting their well-being. While children may not always possess the full capacity to make definitive medical decisions independently, incorporating their views demonstrates respect for their emerging autonomy and personal agency-a cornerstone of ethical patient care.


Incorporating children into treatment planning also enhances communication between healthcare providers, families, and patients themselves. It encourages collaborative discussions where everyone's insights contribute to a comprehensive care plan tailored to the child's unique needs and desires. Such an environment fosters trust among all parties involved-children feel heard; parents gain reassurance through shared decision-making; and healthcare providers craft more personalized treatment strategies that consider emotional as well as physical health aspects.


To effectively implement this approach, it's essential for healthcare systems to develop guidelines supporting age-appropriate communication techniques and tools for assessing children's understanding and preferences accurately. Training programs for medical staff can focus on enhancing interpersonal skills necessary for engaging with young patients sensitively yet effectively. Additionally, creating resources-like visual aids or storytelling methods-that cater to different age groups can bridge communication gaps between complex medical information and child-friendly explanations.


In conclusion, involving children in treatment decisions is not merely an act of courtesy but a fundamental shift towards patient-centered care that acknowledges the individuality of each young patient. By prioritizing inclusivity from an early stage of healthcare encounters, we foster environments where growing individuals feel valued participants rather than passive recipients of care. This approach promises richer therapeutic experiences characterized by enhanced cooperation between families, caregivers, and young patients themselves-a cornerstone for improved patient experiences across pediatrics comprehensively addressing emotional well-being alongside physical health outcomes.

Shared planning for improved patient experiences is a concept that hinges on the fundamental belief that when patients are actively involved in their healthcare journey, the outcomes are not just medically better but profoundly more satisfying. This approach emphasizes the importance of crafting explanations that resonate with a patient's age and understanding, and equally crucial, involving them in key decision-making processes. The significance of these elements cannot be overstated, as they form the bedrock upon which trust, empowerment, and ultimately, enhanced patient experiences are built.


Firstly, let's unpack the power of age-appropriate explanations. Imagine a young child facing a medical procedure; their understanding and emotional readiness differ vastly from an adult or an elderly person. Tailoring explanations to match a patient's developmental stage ensures they grasp what's happening in a way that's comprehensible and less intimidating. For children, using simple language, visuals, and relatable analogies can demystify complex medical jargon. For adults, while simplicity is key, providing detailed information about procedures, potential outcomes, and risks empowers them to make informed decisions. Elderly patients might benefit from explanations that consider possible cognitive changes or hearing impairments, ensuring clarity without overwhelming them with details. By doing so, healthcare providers bridge the communication gap, instilling confidence and reducing anxiety-a cornerstone of positive patient experiences.


Moreover, involving patients in decision-making isn't merely about ticking boxes for compliance; it's about recognizing each individual as an active participant in their healthcare journey. When patients are included in planning their treatment-be it choosing between different therapeutic options or discussing lifestyle changes-they feel valued and respected as collaborators rather than passive recipients of care. This sense of agency significantly impacts their engagement levels; studies show that involved patients adhere better to treatment plans and report higher satisfaction with their care experiences. It fosters a partnership where patients feel empowered to voice concerns, ask questions, and share preferences-ultimately leading to personalized care plans that align closely with their values and lifestyles.


The synergy between age-appropriate communication and shared decision-making creates an environment ripe for improved patient experiences. It encourages transparency from healthcare providers who strive to meet patients where they are-cognitively and emotionally-and invites them into a dialogue about their health journey. Such an approach not only enhances understanding but also fortifies the trust between patient and provider-a critical component of effective healthcare delivery. When individuals feel understood and included in decisions affecting their well-being, they're more likely to navigate their health challenges with resilience and positivity.


In conclusion, shared planning for improved patient experiences thrives on the twin pillars of age-appropriate explanations and meaningful involvement in decision-making processes. These strategies transform healthcare from a one-dimensional service into a collaborative journey where every patient feels seen, heard، وvalued at every step of the way。 As we continue to evolve our approaches to care delivery、 let us remember that at its heart lies the human element-our capacity to connect、 communicate、和empower those we serve。

When we embark on the journey of discussing "Shared Planning for Improved Patient Experiences," especially with children, it's crucial to adopt an approach that's not only educational but also engaging and relatable. The goal here is to ensure that young minds not only understand the importance of shared planning in healthcare settings but also feel a personal stake in their own care experiences. To achieve this, employing a variety of tools and methods can make the concept vivid and memorable. Let's explore some effective strategies tailored to captivate children while imparting valuable insights into shared planning.


Storytelling with Visual Aids


One powerful method is through storytelling, complemented by visual aids. Picture books or comic strips can be incredibly effective. Imagine a story where a character, perhaps a brave little superhero, visits the hospital. Each page could illustrate different steps of shared planning-from discussing concerns with doctors and nurses to choosing between fun activities during recovery. Visual aids like these not only capture attention but also help children visualize themselves in similar situations, making the concept more relatable and less intimidating.


Interactive Models and Puppets


Interactive models and puppets bring an element of play into learning. For instance, using dolls or stuffed animals as 'patients' allows children to role-play scenarios involving shared planning with healthcare providers represented by adults dressed as doctors or nurses. This hands-on approach lets kids experiment with communication, expressing their fears or wishes in a safe environment. The tangible nature of models helps solidify abstract concepts into something concrete they can manipulate and understand better.


Digital Tools and Games


In our increasingly digital world, leveraging technology can be highly engaging for children. Interactive games or apps designed around themes of health and patient experiences offer immersive learning opportunities. These platforms could simulate patient visits where children must decide which questions to ask healthcare providers based on pre-set criteria related to shared planning principles. Such gamified learning not only educates but also makes the process enjoyable, encouraging repeated engagement to master the concepts further.


Collaborative Art Projects


Artistic expression is another powerful tool for engagement and understanding among children. Organizing collaborative art projects where kids create murals or posters about what they believe makes a good patient experience can be both fun and enlightening. This activity encourages discussion about elements like clear communication, empathy from healthcare providers, and involving family members in decision-making processes-core components of shared planning. Displaying these creations in waiting areas or classrooms reinforces the message while giving children a sense of pride in contributing to important conversations about healthcare experiences.


Conclusion


Engaging children in discussions about "Shared Planning for Improved Patient Experiences" requires creativity and adaptability in our teaching methods。By integrating storytelling with visual aids, interactive models and puppetry, digital tools through games, and collaborative art projects,我们不仅能够吸引孩子的注意力,而且能帮助他们内化这些重要概念。在这种参与式学习环境中,儿童不仅成为了知识的接收者,更是积极的参与者和创造者,为未来的健康体验奠定了积极向上的基础。这样的方法不但教育性强,更加重要的是,它培养了孩子们对自身健康和医疗过程的主动参与意识,为他们未来成为有意识的患者和健康倡导者打下坚实的基础。

Setting Realistic Expectations Together: A Pillar for Shared Planning in Enhancing Patient Experiences


In the intricate dance of healthcare, where patients, families, and medical professionals intertwine their efforts to navigate the often complex landscape of health and healing, the significance of setting realistic expectations cannot be overstated. This principle forms a cornerstone in the broader strategy of shared planning aimed at improving patient experiences. At its heart, this approach is about fostering an environment where all parties involved align their hopes and understandings to create a journey that is not only medically sound but also emotionally and psychologically supportive.


The essence of shared planning revolves around collaboration-bringing together diverse perspectives to chart a course that accommodates the multifaceted needs of patients. When it comes to setting realistic expectations, it's crucial to acknowledge that each patient's experience is unique, influenced by their personal health history, emotional state, and sometimes even their cultural background. By engaging patients and their families in discussions early on, healthcare teams can gain invaluable insights into what matters most to them. This might include recovery timelines, pain management preferences, or even simple aspects like maintaining a sense of normalcy during hospital stays.


Realistic expectations are built on honest communication. It involves clearly explaining treatment options, potential outcomes, including both successes and possible challenges. By doing so, healthcare providers empower patients with knowledge that reduces anxiety stemming from uncertainty. When patients understand what to expect-be it the rigors of rehabilitation after surgery or the nuances of managing a chronic condition-they are better equipped to prepare mentally and emotionally. This preparedness significantly enhances their experience within the healthcare system.


Moreover, setting realistic expectations opens avenues for proactive problem-solving. When everyone involved has a clear understanding of what can be realistically achieved within given timeframes or circumstances, identifying potential hurdles becomes easier. This allows for timely interventions and adjustments in care plans before issues escalate into larger concerns affecting patient satisfaction and outcomes negatively.


Additionally, fostering an environment where expectations are set collaboratively nurtures trust between patients and healthcare providers-a vital ingredient for successful healing journeys. Trust encourages open dialogue about concerns or dissatisfactions as they arise rather than letting them fester silently. This continuous feedback loop not only improves individual patient experiences but also contributes valuable insights for systemic improvements across healthcare services.


In essence, "Setting Realistic Expectations Together" is more than just a strategy; it's a commitment to partnership in healthcare-a recognition that improved patient experiences emerge from shared understanding and collective effort. As we continue refining our approaches to healthcare delivery, embracing this principle will remain pivotal in crafting experiences that honor the dignity and needs of every individual under our care. Through collaboration rooted in honesty and mutual respect, we pave the way for healing environments where hope thrives alongside realism-a balance essential for true progress in patient-centered care.

Setting achievable treatment goals in a healthcare context, particularly when involving both parents and children, is a delicate yet crucial process that embodies the essence of shared planning for improved patient experiences. This collaborative approach not only ensures that the treatment plan is tailored to the unique needs of the child but also fosters a supportive environment where every family member feels heard and involved. Here's how this inclusive process can unfold, step by step, to create a harmonious and effective pathway toward health and wellness.


Step 1: Establish Open Communication


The journey begins with creating an atmosphere of open and honest communication. It's essential to hold a meeting where all parties-parents, children, and healthcare providers-feel welcome to express their thoughts, concerns, and expectations without judgment. This initial dialogue sets the tone for collaboration and mutual respect, making everyone feel valued in the decision-making process.


Step 2: Understand the Child's Perspective


Children often have unique insights into what they need or desire regarding their treatment. Engaging them directly-depending on their age and understanding-through conversations or play therapies can reveal their feelings about their condition and what they hope to achieve through treatment. This step is pivotal; it ensures that the child's voice is central to the planning process.


Step 3: Gather Input from Parents


Parents bring invaluable perspectives based on their observations of their child's daily needs and challenges. Their input should be sought regarding practical considerations at home, emotional support required, and any previous experiences with treatments that were successful or less so. Understanding these viewpoints helps in aligning professional recommendations with real-life scenarios at home.


Step 4: Collaboratively Identify Goals


With insights from both parents and children, the next step is to collaboratively identify achievable treatment goals. These should be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound (SMART). For instance, instead of a vague goal like "feeling better," a SMART goal might be "reduce fever episodes to once a month within three months." This clarity ensures everyone understands what success looks like.


Step 5: Customize Treatment Plans


Once goals are set, tailor the treatment plan to accommodate these objectives while considering lifestyle factors discussed earlier. This might involve adjusting medication schedules to fit family routines or incorporating specific activities that aid recovery while being enjoyable for the child. Personalization here is key; one-size-fits-all approaches often falter in fostering engagement and compliance.


Step 6: Establish Support Systems


Recognizing that achieving these goals won't solely rely on medical interventions but also on emotional and practical support systems is crucial. Encourage family involvement in supporting each other during treatments-whether it's attending appointments together or helping with home care routines-and explore community resources like support groups or educational workshops that can provide additional assistance and encouragement.


Step 7: Monitor Progress Together


Setting up regular check-ins where progress towards goals can be reviewed collectively ensures transparency and adjustability in the plan as needed. These sessions should remain positive spaces focusing on achievements no matter how small while reassessing strategies if certain milestones aren't met as expected-a flexible approach keeps hopes alive without fostering frustration or disappointment.


Step 8: Celebrate Successes Big and Small


Lastly, acknowledging successes along the way is vital for maintaining morale and motivation across all family members involved in this journey. Cele

The journey of enhancing patient experiences through shared planning is much like embarking on a grand expedition-a voyage where every participant, from healthcare providers to patients and their families, plays a pivotal role in navigating the complex terrain of medical care. At the heart of this expedition lies a crucial compass: realistic timelines and milestones. These elements are not just administrative tools; they are the very heartbeat that sustains motivation and fosters collaboration throughout the shared planning process.


To appreciate the significance of realistic timelines and milestones, one must first understand the intricate dynamics at play in healthcare environments. Patient experiences are multifaceted, influenced by everything from communication quality to the efficiency of service delivery. Shared planning emerges as a beacon in this complexity, bringing together diverse perspectives to craft care paths tailored to individual needs. However, without a clear roadmap-one marked by achievable milestones and grounded in realistic timeframes-these collaborative efforts risk floundering amidst uncertainty and disheartenment.


Realistic timelines act as guiding stars, illuminating what can be reasonably expected within certain periods. They provide clarity amidst the often murky waters of healthcare operations, where delays and unforeseen challenges are commonplace. When teams-comprising doctors, nurses, administrative staff, and patients-are presented with achievable deadlines for various stages of plan implementation, it instills a sense of direction and purpose. This clarity prevents burnout by ensuring that efforts are aligned with feasible outcomes rather than chasing unattainable perfection within unrealistic time constraints.


Milestones serve as checkpoints along this journey-moments to pause, reflect, and celebrate progress made. Each milestone reached fuels motivation; it's tangible proof that collective effort translates into tangible improvements in patient experiences. These moments of recognition encourage team members to persist through challenges knowing their hard work is making a difference in someone's life-a powerful motivator indeed. Moreover, these achievements foster an environment ripe for learning and adaptation; teams can analyze what worked well and what didn't, refining their approaches for future endeavors with renewed vigor and insight.


Furthermore, shared planning bolstered by realistic timelines and milestones enhances accountability among all stakeholders involved. When everyone understands what is expected at each phase-and when those phases are scheduled realistically-it cultivates a culture where each member feels responsible for contributing to success. This shared sense of responsibility nurtures deeper engagement from all parties involved-patients feel heard and included in decisions about their care; providers find satisfaction in delivering on promises made during these collaborative sessions; administrators observe smoother operations that align with strategic goals set forth by the institution.


In essence, realistic timelines and well-defined milestones breathe life into shared planning initiatives aimed at improving patient experiences. They act as stabilizers against frustration and demotivation by providing structure amidst complexity while simultaneously serving as motivational beacons that guide teams toward common objectives. As we navigate the evolving landscape of healthcare delivery focused increasingly on patient-centricity, let us remember: it's not merely about reaching destinations but also about savoring each step taken together towards better health outcomes-and it's through these structured yet flexible pathways that we truly embark on journeys marked by meaningful progress and sustained motivation for all involved.

Customizing treatment plans to cater to individual needs is a cornerstone of modern healthcare, deeply embedded in the philosophy of shared planning for improved patient experiences. This approach recognizes that every patient is unique, carrying with them a tapestry of personal health histories, preferences, and lifestyle factors that significantly influence their journey toward wellness. By embracing this individuality, healthcare providers can craft treatment plans that are not just effective but also resonate on a personal level with the patients they serve.


The essence of customization lies in understanding the whole person-not just their illness or condition. It involves gathering comprehensive information about a patient's medical history, genetic predispositions, lifestyle choices, psychological state, and social environment. This holistic view allows healthcare professionals to tailor interventions that align closely with an individual's specific needs and circumstances. For instance, a dietary plan for managing diabetes might consider not only the nutritional aspects but also cultural food preferences and the patient's ability to access certain foods, ensuring adherence and effectiveness without undue hardship.


Moreover, customized treatment plans foster a collaborative relationship between patients and healthcare providers. Engaging patients in the planning process empowers them by making them active participants in their care rather than passive receivers of treatments. This shared decision-making enhances patient satisfaction and compliance since individuals are more likely to follow through with plans they have helped create. It also opens channels for ongoing dialogue where patients can voice concerns or adjustments needed as their condition evolves or as they experience different outcomes from their treatment.


The benefits extend beyond improved compliance; personalized care can lead to better health outcomes overall. When treatments are aligned with an individual's unique profile, there's often an increase in efficacy and a reduction in adverse effects or unnecessary procedures. This precision medicine approach not only focuses on curing diseases but also on enhancing quality of life throughout the treatment journey.


However, achieving this level of customization requires resources-time for thorough assessment, expertise in various disciplines to address multifaceted health needs, and sometimes advanced technology for personalized diagnostics and monitoring. Healthcare systems must invest in training staff to be more attuned to individual patient nuances and integrating diverse data sources seamlessly into care planning processes.


In conclusion, customizing treatment plans for individual needs is not merely an idealistic goal but a practical approach that significantly enhances patient experiences in shared care planning initiatives. It reflects respect for each person's unique story while aiming for optimal health outcomes through collaboration and personalization. As we continue advancing in medical science and technology, prioritizing this individualized approach will remain crucial in delivering compassionate, effective healthcare tailored precisely to those we strive to help-our patients themselves.

Shared planning in the realm of pediatric dentistry, particularly when focusing on improving patient experiences, represents a paradigm shift from a one-size-fits-all approach to a more nuanced, personalized strategy that caters to each child's unique dental and emotional needs. This method recognizes the fundamental truth that every child is different; they come with their own set of challenges, fears, dental health histories, and developmental stages that influence how they experience dental care. By embracing shared planning-a collaborative process involving dentists, parents, and sometimes even the children themselves-we can craft tailored approaches that not only address immediate dental concerns but also foster a positive relationship with dental care that lasts a lifetime.


The essence of shared planning lies in communication and cooperation among all stakeholders involved in a child's dental health. Dentists, armed with their expertise, initiate discussions with parents to understand the broader context of the child's health and emotional well-being. This conversation might reveal specific anxieties about dental visits stemming from past experiences or general fears common among children. Simultaneously, dentists share their observations and recommendations based on the child's current dental condition, growth patterns, and any special needs that might affect treatment approaches.


Incorporating the child's perspective is pivotal. Depending on their age and comfort level, involving children in the planning process can significantly alleviate anxiety by giving them a sense of control over what happens to them. Simple acts like discussing what they can expect during their visit or allowing them to choose certain aspects-like picking a favorite character sticker to place on their chart-can transform an intimidating experience into something more comfortable and familiar.


Tailored approaches resulting from shared planning may manifest in various ways: adjusting appointment times to avoid peak anxiety periods for some children; using storytelling or gentle explanations suited to a child's understanding level; employing specialized techniques or tools designed for sensitive mouths or those with special needs; or creating distraction methods like using technology or engaging games during procedures. These personalized strategies acknowledge each child's unique threshold for stress and adapt accordingly, ensuring that every visit is as comfortable as possible while achieving necessary dental care objectives.


Moreover, shared planning encourages continuous feedback loops where parents can voice their observations about their child's responses at home after visits, enabling adjustments to be made promptly for subsequent appointments. Dentists can utilize this information to fine-tune their approach further, creating an evolving plan that respects both the changing needs of the child's oral health and their emotional journey through these experiences.


In conclusion, shared planning for improved patient experiences in pediatric dentistry exemplifies compassionate care by weaving together professional insight with personal considerations specific to each young patient. It emphasizes collaboration as key to unlocking tailored approaches that not only address immediate dental needs but also nurture positive associations with oral healthcare from an early age. Through thoughtful engagement with families and careful attention to individual differences in dental health and emotional resilience, we pave the way for healthier smiles grounded in trust and understanding-a foundation crucial for lifelong oral wellness.

Personalized treatment, especially when woven into the fabric of shared planning, has become a beacon of hope in transforming patient experiences across various healthcare settings. This approach underscores the significance of tailoring medical care to the unique needs, preferences, and life circumstances of each individual. To truly appreciate its impact, let's delve into a couple of compelling case studies that illuminate how shared planning can lead to remarkable success in personalized treatment.


Case Study 1: Chronic Pain Management


Consider Sarah, a 45-year-old woman battling chronic back pain for over a decade. Traditional treatment methods had offered little relief, leading to frustration and a sense of helplessness. Enter shared planning, where her healthcare team-comprising a primary care physician, physical therapist, psychologist, and an occupational therapist-came together to craft a comprehensive plan tailored specifically to Sarah's lifestyle and pain triggers.


During their initial meeting, the team didn't just focus on medication or surgery; they explored Sarah's daily routines, work environment, and emotional well-being. They discovered that long hours at her desk job exacerbated her pain and that stress significantly heightened her discomfort levels. Armed with this insight, they devised a multifaceted approach: ergonomic adjustments at work, targeted physical therapy sessions focusing on strengthening core muscles, mindfulness practices for stress management, and periodic medication reviews to ensure efficacy without over-reliance on painkillers.


The shared planning process empowered Sarah to take an active role in her treatment journey. Regular follow-ups allowed for adjustments based on her progress and feedback. Over time, not only did Sarah experience substantial reductions in pain but also regained control over her life. The collaborative effort created a supportive network that addressed not just the physical aspect but also the emotional burdens associated with chronic illness-a testament to how personalized treatment through shared planning can profoundly enhance patient experiences.


Case Study 2: Diabetes Management Among Adolescents


Shifting focus to another scenario involving young patients-let's look at Jake, a 16-year-old diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes. Managing diabetes during adolescence comes with unique challenges; it's not merely about regulating blood sugar but also navigating social dynamics and emerging independence. Here again, shared planning played a pivotal role in personalizing Jake's treatment plan around his lifestyle and developmental needs.


Jake's care team included an endocrinologist, dietitian, school nurse educator, and importantly-his parents-and even involved Jake directly in discussions from an early stage to foster ownership over his health management. Recognizing that peer interactions heavily influence dietary choices and activity levels for adolescents, the team integrated strategies like using technology (a user-friendly app for tracking glucose levels) into Jake's routine without making it feel overly restrictive or adult-centric. They discussed realistic goals aligned with his school schedule and social activities while ensuring his family was equipped to support him without hovering excessively-a delicate balance essential during teenage years.


The personalized approach paid dividends; Jake felt understood rather than just treated as a case file. His blood sugar management improved significantly as he learned to make informed choices that fit seamlessly into his life rather than being seen as burdensome obligations. More importantly, he developed confidence in managing his condition independently-a crucial skill for long-term health success beyond adolescence.


These case studies exemplify how personalized treatment through shared planning not only addresses medical needs but transforms patient experiences by fostering engagement、empowerment、and holistic care that respects each

Incorporating Feedback Loops in Shared Planning for Improved Patient Experiences: A Human Approach


In the ever-evolving landscape of healthcare, the notion of shared planning has emerged as a pivotal strategy aimed at enhancing patient experiences. At its core, shared planning involves collaborative efforts among healthcare providers, patients, and sometimes their families or caregivers, to craft personalized care plans that resonate with the unique needs and preferences of each individual. Central to this approach is the integration of feedback loops-a dynamic mechanism designed to ensure continuous improvement and responsiveness to patient experiences. This essay explores how incorporating feedback loops into shared planning not only enriches the quality of care but also fosters a deeper sense of partnership between healthcare providers and patients.


Feedback loops are essentially mechanisms that facilitate the collection, analysis, and application of patient feedback within the planning process. These loops can manifest in various forms-ranging from direct conversations post-care sessions to structured surveys and digital platforms that allow real-time input. The essence lies not merely in gathering data but in creating an environment where every piece of feedback is valued and acted upon, reinforcing a culture of responsiveness and respect for patient perspectives.


The first significant benefit of integrating feedback loops into shared planning is the enhancement of personalized care. By actively listening to patient feedback, healthcare teams gain invaluable insights into what works well and what areas need refinement from the patient's viewpoint. This understanding allows for tailored adjustments to care plans that better align with individual preferences and life circumstances, contributing significantly to improved satisfaction levels. Patients who feel their voices are heard are more likely to engage positively with their treatment plans, adhering more closely to prescribed regimens and actively participating in their health journey.


Moreover, feedback loops foster a climate of transparency and trust between patients and providers. When patients see that their opinions lead to tangible changes in their care experience, it strengthens their confidence in the healthcare system. This trust is foundational for effective patient-provider relationships; it encourages open communication about concerns or needs that might otherwise go unaddressed. In turn, this transparency helps identify systemic issues within healthcare delivery that might negatively impact patient experiences across broader populations-not just individuals-and prompts necessary reforms.


Additionally, these loops serve as educational tools for both patients and providers alike. Patients become more informed about their health conditions and treatment options as they provide insights based on lived experiences. Conversely, healthcare professionals gain deeper understanding through direct engagement with patients' perspectives, enabling them to refine practices based on real-world implications rather than theoretical assumptions alone. This mutual learning process enriches shared planning by ensuring it remains grounded in practical realities rather than abstract objectives.


However, implementing effective feedback loops requires careful consideration and strategic design. It necessitates creating accessible channels for feedback collection that accommodate diverse patient needs-considering factors like language barriers or technological proficiency-and ensuring confidentiality and respect in all interactions. Moreover, organizations must establish clear pathways for translating feedback into actionable improvements while maintaining accountability for these changes within the system. Without such thoughtful execution, there's a risk that feedback becomes mere lip service rather than a catalyst for meaningful change.


In conclusion, incorporating feedback loops into shared planning represents a powerful stride toward improving patient experiences by promoting personalization, trust, transparency،和互动学习。在这个过程中,患者不再仅仅是护理的接受者,而是成为了规划中的关键合作伙伴。通过这样的互动,不仅个体的健康 Outcomes可以得到

Shared planning in the context of healthcare, particularly when focusing on ensuring patient satisfaction and enhancing experiences throughout treatment, hinges critically on the establishment of robust mechanisms for ongoing feedback. This approach is not merely about collecting patient opinions; it's about crafting a dynamic dialogue that allows for continuous improvement and adaptation of treatment plans to better suit individual needs. Here's how such a system can be effectively implemented, ensuring that treatment journeys are as personalized and satisfying as possible.


Regular Check-ins: The Foundation of Feedback


The cornerstone of ongoing feedback mechanisms is regular, scheduled check-ins between patients and their healthcare providers. These shouldn't be mere formalities but opportunities for open conversation. During these sessions, patients should feel encouraged to voice any discomfort, concerns, or positive experiences they've encountered since the last visit. Healthcare providers, in turn, should actively listen, demonstrating empathy and understanding while noting down key points for consideration in adjusting treatment plans. These check-ins can occur at various touchpoints-after significant milestones in treatment, during routine appointments, or even via scheduled phone calls or video consultations for those with mobility challenges or busy schedules.


Utilizing Technology for Seamless Communication


In our increasingly digital world, leveraging technology can significantly enhance feedback mechanisms. Patient portals equipped with secure messaging systems allow individuals to communicate with their care teams outside traditional office hours. This immediacy ensures that concerns are addressed promptly, fostering a sense of being heard and valued. Additionally, incorporating digital surveys tailored to specific stages of treatment can provide structured yet flexible feedback opportunities without overwhelming patients with lengthy questionnaires at every visit. These tools not only streamline communication but also ensure data is collected systematically for analysis and action.


Empowering Patients Through Education


For feedback to be meaningful and actionable, patients must feel informed and empowered regarding their health journey. Educational sessions-whether one-on-one with healthcare providers or through group workshops-can demystify treatment processes and outcomes, encouraging patients to engage more deeply in shared planning discussions. Understanding the rationale behind certain treatments or changes in plan helps patients articulate their experiences more accurately and contribute constructively to the decision-making process regarding their care.


Adaptive Treatment Planning: A Response to Feedback


The true essence of shared planning lies in its adaptability based on the feedback received. Treatment plans should not be static documents but living guides that evolve with the patient's progress and changing needs. Healthcare teams must cultivate a mindset of flexibility-ready to pivot therapies, medication regimens, or even support services based on ongoing input from patients. This might involve revisiting goals regularly to ensure they remain aligned with what matters most to the patient at each stage of their journey. It's crucial that these adaptations are communicated clearly back to the patient, reinforcing their active role in shaping their care experience.


Creating a Culture of Openness and Responsiveness


Lastly, fostering an organizational culture that values transparency and responsiveness is pivotal for successful shared planning initiatives aimed at improving patient experiences through ongoing feedback mechanisms. Everyone involved-from front-line staff to senior management-must recognize the importance of patient input as vital data driving improvements across all facets of care delivery. Encouraging a culture where feedback is seen as an asset rather than merely data points empowers both staff and patients alike to work collaboratively toward optimal outcomes grounded in personal satisfaction and well-being.


In conclusion, by implementing regular check-ins paired with technological aids for seamless communication

Shared planning for improved patient experiences is a multifaceted approach that hinges on the foundational principle of communication-particularly, the regular check-ins between healthcare providers, patients, and their families. In an era where patient-centered care is not just a goal but a necessity, these check-ins serve as vital touchpoints that ensure everyone involved in a patient's care journey is aligned, informed, and engaged. The importance of such practices cannot be overstated; they are the linchpin in fostering an environment where patients feel heard, understood, and cared for, thereby significantly enhancing their overall experience within the healthcare system.


Regular check-ins create an open channel for dialogue. They allow patients and their families to voice concerns, ask questions, and express feelings about their treatment plans or hospital stay without feeling rushed or dismissed. This open line of communication is crucial because it empowers patients to take an active role in their health management. When individuals feel they have a say in their care plan, their adherence to treatments often improves, and so does their satisfaction with the service received.


Moreover, these interactions provide healthcare professionals with invaluable insights into the patient's perspective. Understanding a patient's concerns-be it related to pain management, emotional well-being, or logistical issues like appointment scheduling-enables staff to tailor services more effectively. It transforms generic care protocols into personalized experiences that resonate with each individual's unique needs and circumstances. This personalized approach not only addresses immediate concerns but also builds trust and rapport between patients and caregivers-a cornerstone of healing and recovery.


In addition to addressing immediate issues, regular check-ins foster a sense of community and support around the patient. Involving parents or guardians in these discussions ensures that all voices at the table are considered when making decisions about care plans. This inclusivity can alleviate anxiety for families navigating complex health situations and ensures that every aspect of the patient's well-being-physical, emotional, and social-is taken into account during shared planning sessions.


The benefits extend beyond individual encounters; they contribute significantly to institutional learning and improvement. Feedback gathered through these interactions can highlight systemic areas needing enhancement or innovation within healthcare services. By listening closely to patient experiences and concerns during regular check-ins, healthcare organizations can identify trends that point towards broader improvements in policies, procedures, and even staff training programs aimed at enhancing empathy and effective communication skills among personnel.


In essence, prioritizing regular check-ins as part of shared planning initiatives represents a profound commitment to improving patient experiences from multiple angles-it nurtures trust between providers and patients, enhances personalization of care delivery models, fosters community within clinical settings, and drives continuous improvement across healthcare systems. As we move forward in our quest for excellence in health care provisioning, let us remember: it's not just about treating illnesses; it's about nurturing relationships built on respectful dialogue and shared understanding-a foundation upon which improved health outcomes are sure to follow.

In the rapidly evolving landscape of healthcare, the fusion of technology and patient engagement stands as a beacon of transformative potential, especially when it comes to shared planning for improved patient experiences. This synergy isn't merely about adopting the latest gadgets or software; it's about crafting a more personalized, efficient, and empathetic healthcare journey for every individual. Let's delve into how leveraging technology can revolutionize the way we plan and deliver care, making it more aligned with patients' needs and expectations.


At the heart of this transformation lies the ability to communicate more effectively. Traditional methods often leave patients feeling like passive recipients of care rather than active participants in their health journey. With technology, we can bridge this gap through user-friendly platforms that facilitate seamless communication between patients and healthcare providers. Imagine an app where patients can easily schedule appointments, request prescription refills, or even send quick updates about their condition to their healthcare team. Such tools not only enhance convenience but also foster a sense of partnership, where both parties are on the same page regarding treatment plans and goals.


Moreover, data analytics and artificial intelligence offer profound insights that can tailor experiences to individual needs. By analyzing vast amounts of patient data-preferences, past interactions, health outcomes-healthcare providers can anticipate needs and customize care plans proactively. For instance, an AI-driven system might recognize patterns indicating a patient is at risk of non-adherence to medication schedules due to lifestyle factors and suggest interventions before issues arise. This predictive approach not only improves outcomes but also empowers patients by showing they are central to the decision-making process.


Telehealth services have emerged as a pivotal tool in enhancing engagement through technology. The pandemic has accelerated their adoption, demonstrating how virtual consultations can make healthcare more accessible, particularly for those with mobility challenges or living in remote areas. Beyond convenience, telehealth allows for continuous care monitoring and adjustments without geographical constraints, ensuring that every patient's voice is heard and considered in their care plan-regardless of location.


Furthermore, incorporating feedback mechanisms directly within these technological platforms is crucial for fostering an environment of shared planning. Patients should feel empowered to rate their experiences, provide suggestions for improvements, or express concerns instantly. This two-way feedback loop not only enhances service quality but also builds trust-a cornerstone of effective patient-provider relationships. When patients see their input leading to tangible changes in their care experience, it reinforces the notion that they are valued partners rather than mere recipients of services.


However, while embracing technology promises immense benefits, it's essential to navigate potential pitfalls carefully-ensuring data privacy and security remain paramount while designing these systems. Patients must trust that their sensitive information is safeguarded as diligently as their health is cared for. Moreover, we must remember that technology should complement rather than replace human interaction; empathetic human touch remains irreplaceable in healing and support processes.


In conclusion, leveraging technology for enhanced engagement in shared planning represents a significant stride towards improving patient experiences in healthcare settings. By harnessing communication tools, predictive analytics, telehealth capabilities-and most importantly-by involving patients actively in their own care journeys-we pave the way for a future where healthcare is not just about treating illnesses but about nurturing well-being through collaboration and understanding. As we embrace these advancements thoughtfully和以人为本的方式,我们不仅提升了医疗服务的效率和效果,更重要的是,我们构建了

Shared planning, particularly in the healthcare sector, represents a transformative approach to enhancing patient experiences by fostering collaboration among patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals. In this evolving landscape, technology plays a pivotal role, offering innovative tools that streamline communication and coordination, ultimately leading to improved outcomes and heightened satisfaction for all parties involved. Let's explore how digital simulations, mobile applications, and virtual consultations are reshaping the realm of shared planning.


Digital simulations emerge as a powerful tool in preparing both patients and healthcare providers for various medical procedures or treatment plans. These simulations can provide immersive experiences that mirror real-life scenarios, allowing patients to visualize their treatment journey and understand potential outcomes. For instance, virtual reality (VR) can simulate postoperative recovery processes or the intricacies of managing chronic diseases. By engaging with these realistic simulations, patients become active participants in their care planning, which can significantly reduce anxiety and enhance their preparedness. Moreover, healthcare providers benefit from these simulations by gaining insights into patient perspectives, enabling more empathetic and tailored planning sessions.


Apps designed for health management have revolutionized how patients engage with their health plans outside of clinical settings. These applications often feature personalized dashboards where patients can track medications, appointments, vital signs, and even communicate directly with their healthcare team. Such apps empower individuals to take ownership of their health journeys by providing accessible information at their fingertips. Shared planning is further facilitated as these platforms allow for seamless integration of data from various sources-be it wearable health monitors or electronic health records-ensuring everyone involved has up-to-date insights into the patient's condition and progress. This accessibility fosters proactive discussions during consultations and encourages ongoing collaboration between visits.


Virtual consultations have emerged as a cornerstone in facilitating shared planning across geographical barriers. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telehealth services, proving not just a necessity but a valuable addition to traditional care models. Through video conferencing platforms tailored for healthcare interactions, patients can participate in consultations from the comfort of their homes. This accessibility is particularly beneficial for those with mobility issues or living in remote areas where accessing specialized care might otherwise be challenging. Virtual consultations make it easier to involve family members or caregivers in discussions without logistical hurdles, ensuring that shared decisions are made collaboratively and inclusively-a critical aspect of enhancing patient experiences.


The convergence of these technological tools-digital simulations, apps for health management, and virtual consultations-paves the way for an integrated approach to shared planning in healthcare. By leveraging these innovations effectively, healthcare systems can create environments where patient voices are central to decision-making processes. This shift not only improves individual patient experiences but also contributes to overall systemic efficiency by reducing unnecessary hospital visits and enhancing continuity of care across different settings and practitioners. As we continue to embrace these technologies with thoughtfulness and intention, we move closer to realizing a future where shared planning isn't just an ideal but a standard practice that genuinely enhances the quality of care delivered to every individual seeking health support.

Shared planning in the context of healthcare represents a transformative approach to patient care, fundamentally shifting the dynamics from a one-sided medical directive to a collaborative partnership between healthcare providers and patients. This shift is significantly amplified by the advent and integration of advanced technologies, which hold the promise of not only improving understanding but also enhancing involvement in the treatment process. The synergy between shared planning and technology can redefine patient experiences, making them more informed, engaged, and ultimately, more satisfied with their healthcare journey.


The cornerstone of this enhancement lies in digital health tools, which include electronic health records (EHRs), patient portals, mobile health apps, and telehealth services. These technologies provide platforms where patients can access comprehensive information about their health conditions, treatment options, and potential outcomes in an easily digestible format. Imagine a scenario where a patient diagnosed with diabetes can log into a secure patient portal to review their latest blood glucose readings, educational materials on diet management, and interact directly with their healthcare team to adjust their treatment plan-all from the comfort of home. Such accessibility demystifies complex medical jargon and empowers patients to take an active role in managing their health.


Moreover, telehealth has revolutionized how patients engage with their healthcare providers. Virtual consultations break down geographical barriers and allow for more frequent communication without the logistical challenges of travel. Patients can discuss symptoms, ask questions about medications or therapies, and receive immediate feedback-fostering a sense of being heard and understood. This continuous dialogue ensures that treatment plans are not only tailored to individual needs but also adjusted swiftly in response to changing health statuses or concerns.


Another pivotal aspect is patient education technology. Interactive tutorials, virtual reality simulations for surgical procedures, or gamified approaches to medication adherence educate patients in ways traditional methods cannot match. By engaging multiple senses and offering interactive learning experiences, these technologies enhance comprehension and retention of critical health information. When patients understand why certain treatments are necessary or how lifestyle changes can impact their condition positively, they're more likely to adhere to prescribed regimens actively participate in shared decision-making processes.


Furthermore, wearable technology contributes significantly by providing real-time monitoring data that both patients and providers can access. Devices tracking heart rates, physical activity levels, or sleep patterns offer tangible insights into how daily activities affect one's health status. This data-driven approach not only personalizes treatment plans but also encourages patients to see the direct impact of their actions on their well-being-a powerful motivator for sustained engagement in treatment processes.


In essence, technology's role in facilitating shared planning isn't merely about adding digital tools; it's about fostering an environment where patients feel valued partners rather than passive recipients of care. Through improved understanding bolstered by accessible information and increased involvement facilitated by interactive platforms and devices, both parties contribute equally toward crafting effective treatment strategies tailored uniquely to individual needs和情况。This collaborative spirit not only enhances patient experiences but also leads to better outcomes through increased adherence to treatments、more proactive management of conditions、and ultimately،a deeper satisfaction with the care received.


As we continue advancing into an era where technology permeates every aspect of life، its integration into healthcare through shared planning presents an exciting frontier-a frontier poised to redefine what it means for patients to be truly involved in their own healing journeys、making each step forward not just medically sound but deeply personal和人性化。

Evaluating Success: Measuring Patient Experience in Shared Planning for Improved Patient Experiences


In the ever-evolving landscape of healthcare, the concept of shared planning has emerged as a beacon of hope for enhancing patient experiences. This collaborative approach, where patients, families, and healthcare providers work together to design care plans, is not merely a trend but a fundamental shift towards person-centered care. To truly gauge the success of such initiatives, it's vital to delve into the nuances of measuring patient experience effectively. This essay explores how shared planning can serve as both a tool for improvement and a metric for success in evaluating patient experiences.


At its core, shared planning is about listening-truly hearing what patients have to say about their health journeys and involving them in decisions that directly affect their well-being. When patients feel heard and valued, it naturally leads to higher satisfaction levels. However, satisfaction alone doesn't paint a complete picture; it's essential to look deeper into various facets that contribute to an overall positive experience. Herein lies the challenge-and opportunity-of measurement.


One effective approach is through comprehensive feedback mechanisms that capture both quantitative and qualitative data. Surveys are a common method, offering structured insights into patient perceptions regarding communication, empathy, and the clarity of information provided by healthcare teams. Yet, these should be complemented with open-ended questions that allow patients to share their stories-the unexpected moments of kindness or frustration that significantly impact their experiences but might not surface in numerical ratings.


Moreover, incorporating direct observations from healthcare providers can offer another layer of understanding. Observing interactions during shared planning sessions can reveal much about the dynamics at play-how inclusively patients are engaged, how their insights are integrated into care plans, and the overall atmosphere of respect and collaboration fostered during these meetings. These observations can highlight areas where processes might need refinement for even better outcomes.


Another crucial aspect is tracking long-term outcomes tied to patient experience metrics derived from shared planning initiatives. For instance, monitoring readmission rates post-discharge can provide insight into how well care plans align with patient needs outside the clinical setting-a tangible measure of effectiveness beyond immediate hospital stays. Similarly, looking at adherence to treatment plans initiated through shared decision-making illuminates whether patients feel empowered enough to manage their health proactively post-discharge.


It's also important to recognize that measuring success isn't just about identifying areas needing improvement-it's equally about celebrating achievements and sharing learnings across different healthcare settings. By establishing benchmarks and best practices derived from successful shared planning cases, healthcare institutions can inspire one another toward continuous enhancement of patient experiences everywhere.


In conclusion, evaluating success in measuring patient experience within the framework of shared planning requires an holistic approach-one that values both qualitative narratives and quantitative indicators while remaining vigilant on long-term outcomes tied to those initial interactions between patients and their care teams. As we strive toward more person-centered care models, embracing this multifaceted evaluation strategy ensures we're not just meeting standards but exceeding expectations in delivering truly meaningful patient experiences that resonate long after clinical visits end.

Shared planning, a collaborative approach involving patients, healthcare providers, and sometimes families or care teams in the decision-making process regarding treatment and care plans, has emerged as a pivotal strategy to enhance patient experiences. The essence of this approach lies in recognizing patients as active participants rather than passive recipients of care. To effectively assess the impact of shared planning on improving patient experiences, it's vital to adopt a multifaceted approach that encompasses both qualitative and quantitative metrics, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of its benefits and areas for improvement.


Quantitative Metrics:




  1. Patient Satisfaction Scores: Implementing standardized surveys post-treatment or during follow-ups can provide concrete data on how shared planning influences patient satisfaction. Questions should specifically target aspects like involvement in decision-making, understanding of the treatment plan, and overall experience with the care process.




  2. Readmission Rates: A decrease in readmission rates can indicate that patients are better informed and more engaged in their care processes due to shared planning. This metric reflects not just improved patient experiences but also enhanced health outcomes.




  3. Adherence to Treatment Plans: Tracking how well patients adhere to prescribed treatments can serve as an indirect measure of their engagement level during the planning phase. Greater adherence often correlates with patients feeling more invested in their care plans due to having a say in their development.




Qualitative Metrics:




  1. Patient Narratives: Collecting stories or testimonials from patients about their experiences with shared planning allows for a deeper insight into how this approach affects their emotional and psychological well-being alongside physical health outcomes. These narratives can highlight aspects like empowerment, trust in caregivers, and perceived control over health decisions that quantitative data might overlook.




  2. Focus Groups and Interviews: Conducting discussions with patients who have experienced shared planning can yield rich insights into what works well and what could be improved within the framework. These sessions can explore nuanced feelings about collaboration, communication quality, and overall satisfaction with the care received.




  3. Healthcare Provider Feedback: Gathering perspectives from healthcare professionals involved in the shared planning process provides an external viewpoint on its effectiveness. Providers can share observations on changes in patient engagement levels, communication dynamics, and any challenges encountered during implementation, offering a balanced view of shared planning's impact on patient experiences from both sides of the consultation room.




Methods for Assessment:


To effectively utilize these metrics and methods for assessing the effectiveness of shared planning on patient experiences:




  • Longitudinal Studies: Implement ongoing assessments over extended periods to capture long-term impacts on patient satisfaction and health outcomes.




  • Control Groups: Where feasible, compare outcomes between groups experiencing traditional care versus those involved in shared planning to isolate variables affecting patient experience improvements.




  • Continuous Feedback Loops: Establish systems for regular feedback collection post-implementation phases to allow for iterative improvements based on real-time insights from both patients and providers.




  • Multidisciplinary Analysis Teams: Form teams composed of healthcare providers, patient advocates, and researchers to analyze data comprehensively from various angles-medical efficacy, emotional impact, logistical feasibility-ensuring all facets are considered when evaluating success or areas needing attention.




In conclusion, assessing the effectiveness of shared planning for improved patient experiences requires a blend of measurable outcomes-like satisfaction scores and readmission rates-and qualitative insights drawn from personal narratives and provider observations. By employing these diverse metrics through structured

Shared planning for improved patient experiences is a cornerstone of modern healthcare, reflecting a profound shift towards patient-centered care. This approach isn't merely about treating illnesses; it's about crafting a journey where patients feel valued, heard, and actively involved in their care processes. At the heart of this transformation lies the principle of continuous improvement, fueled by learning from patient feedback and outcomes. This iterative process not only enhances the quality of care but also fosters a culture of respect and collaboration between healthcare providers and patients.


The essence of shared planning revolves around building partnerships with patients from the outset. It involves engaging them in discussions about their health goals, preferences, and concerns, ensuring that every plan is tailored to their unique needs and circumstances. This collaborative approach begins with open communication; healthcare teams must create an environment where patients feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and feelings without fear of judgment. Feedback mechanisms-whether through direct conversations, surveys, or digital platforms-become vital tools in this process, allowing patients to articulate their experiences and suggestions for improvement continually.


Learning from patient feedback is not just about acknowledging what's working well but critically examining areas that fall short. Outcomes, both positive and negative, are invaluable data points that guide refinement efforts. When patients share their experiences-be it the warmth of a nurse's reassurance or the frustration of lengthy wait times-these insights illuminate paths for enhancement. Healthcare providers must cultivate a mindset geared towards learning; every piece of feedback is an opportunity to understand better how services can be fine-tuned to meet patient expectations more effectively.


This continuous improvement loop is dynamic and multifaceted. It requires not only collecting feedback but also analyzing it thoughtfully to identify patterns and underlying issues. Teams must then brainstorm innovative solutions collaboratively with patients, ensuring that changes are meaningful and impactful. For instance, if multiple patients mention difficulty navigating a clinic's layout, perhaps a redesign project could involve current patients in the planning stages to ensure the new layout truly meets their needs.


Furthermore, sharing these improvements back with patients demonstrates commitment to their voices shaping their care experience-a powerful affirmation of their importance in the healthcare ecosystem. Transparency in implementing changes fosters trust and encourages ongoing engagement from patients who see tangible results stemming from their input.


In conclusion, shared planning for improved patient experiences hinges on embracing continuous improvement as a core value-one deeply rooted in listening to patient feedback and measuring outcomes against those very insights. By creating a culture where every voice matters and every experience counts, healthcare providers can refine future approaches continuously. This not only elevates the standard of care but also builds lasting relationships based on mutual respect and collaboration-a true testament to putting the 'patient' at the heart of healthcare delivery.

Shared planning in pediatric orthodontic care represents a transformative approach that significantly enhances patient experiences by fostering a collaborative environment among all stakeholders involved in a child's dental journey. This methodology isn't merely about coordinating appointments and treatments; it's about creating a comprehensive, patient-centered framework where every voice-from the child to the parents, and from the orthodontist to the dental hygienist-contributes to crafting an individualized plan that prioritizes not just clinical outcomes, but also emotional and psychological wellbeing.


The essence of shared planning lies in its ability to bridge gaps between different perspectives, merging professional expertise with personal insights. When orthodontists engage directly with parents and children, they gain invaluable insights into the family's expectations, concerns, and daily routines. This understanding allows for treatments that are not only clinically sound but also seamlessly integrated into the child's life, reducing anxiety and increasing compliance. For instance, discussing treatment timelines during a family meeting can help align expectations and prepare everyone for what lies ahead, transforming potential sources of stress into manageable milestones.


Moreover, shared planning encourages an interdisciplinary approach, involving various specialists such as pediatric dentists, oral surgeons, and even psychologists when necessary. This teamwork ensures that every aspect of a child's oral health is considered holistically. It opens doors for innovative solutions tailored specifically to each child's unique needs-be it adapting treatment plans for children with special healthcare needs or incorporating cutting-edge technology to make procedures less intimidating.


Furthermore, this collaborative framework empowers patients by making them active participants in their care journey rather than passive recipients of treatment. When children understand their condition and the reasons behind certain procedures, they're more likely to feel confident and cooperative during treatments. Engaging them in discussions about their preferences for appliances or colors on braces can turn an otherwise daunting experience into something they look forward to-a rite of passage marked by small victories and personalized touches that affirm their individuality.


Parents play a pivotal role in this process too. Their involvement ensures continuity of care at home and reinforces the importance of oral hygiene practices post-treatment. Shared planning sessions provide them with clear guidance on maintaining oral health between visits and recognizing signs that might necessitate immediate attention-a partnership that extends beyond the clinic walls into everyday life.


In essence, shared planning redefines pediatric orthodontic care by placing empathy and collaboration at its core. It acknowledges that every smile is unique-not just in terms of dental structure but also in terms of emotional significance. By weaving together the threads of professional insight with personal narratives, we create a tapestry of care that respects individual differences while aiming for universally positive outcomes: healthy smiles backed by confidence and joyful experiences throughout the orthodontic journey.

A health professional, healthcare professional, or healthcare worker (sometimes abbreviated HCW)[1] is a provider of health care treatment and advice based on formal training and experience. The field includes those who work as a nurse, physician (such as family physician, internist, obstetrician, psychiatrist, radiologist, surgeon etc.), physician assistant, registered dietitian, veterinarian, veterinary technician, optometrist, pharmacist, pharmacy technician, medical assistant, physical therapist, occupational therapist, dentist, midwife, psychologist, audiologist, or healthcare scientist, or who perform services in allied health professions. Experts in public health and community health are also health professionals.

Fields

[edit]
NY College of Health Professions massage therapy class
US Navy doctors deliver a healthy baby
70% of global health and social care workers are women, 30% of leaders in the global health sector are women

The healthcare workforce comprises a wide variety of professions and occupations who provide some type of healthcare service, including such direct care practitioners as physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses, respiratory therapists, dentists, pharmacists, speech-language pathologist, physical therapists, occupational therapists, physical and behavior therapists, as well as allied health professionals such as phlebotomists, medical laboratory scientists, dieticians, and social workers. They often work in hospitals, healthcare centers and other service delivery points, but also in academic training, research, and administration. Some provide care and treatment services for patients in private homes. Many countries have a large number of community health workers who work outside formal healthcare institutions. Managers of healthcare services, health information technicians, and other assistive personnel and support workers are also considered a vital part of health care teams.[2]

Healthcare practitioners are commonly grouped into health professions. Within each field of expertise, practitioners are often classified according to skill level and skill specialization. "Health professionals" are highly skilled workers, in professions that usually require extensive knowledge including university-level study leading to the award of a first degree or higher qualification.[3] This category includes physicians, physician assistants, registered nurses, veterinarians, veterinary technicians, veterinary assistants, dentists, midwives, radiographers, pharmacists, physiotherapists, optometrists, operating department practitioners and others. Allied health professionals, also referred to as "health associate professionals" in the International Standard Classification of Occupations, support implementation of health care, treatment and referral plans usually established by medical, nursing, respiratory care, and other health professionals, and usually require formal qualifications to practice their profession. In addition, unlicensed assistive personnel assist with providing health care services as permitted.[citation needed]

Another way to categorize healthcare practitioners is according to the sub-field in which they practice, such as mental health care, pregnancy and childbirth care, surgical care, rehabilitation care, or public health.[citation needed]

Mental health

[edit]

A mental health professional is a health worker who offers services to improve the mental health of individuals or treat mental illness. These include psychiatrists, psychiatry physician assistants, clinical, counseling, and school psychologists, occupational therapists, clinical social workers, psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners, marriage and family therapists, mental health counselors, as well as other health professionals and allied health professions. These health care providers often deal with the same illnesses, disorders, conditions, and issues; however, their scope of practice often differs. The most significant difference across categories of mental health practitioners is education and training.[4] There are many damaging effects to the health care workers. Many have had diverse negative psychological symptoms ranging from emotional trauma to very severe anxiety. Health care workers have not been treated right and because of that their mental, physical, and emotional health has been affected by it. The SAGE author's said that there were 94% of nurses that had experienced at least one PTSD after the traumatic experience. Others have experienced nightmares, flashbacks, and short and long term emotional reactions.[5] The abuse is causing detrimental effects on these health care workers. Violence is causing health care workers to have a negative attitude toward work tasks and patients, and because of that they are "feeling pressured to accept the order, dispense a product, or administer a medication".[6] Sometimes it can range from verbal to sexual to physical harassment, whether the abuser is a patient, patient's families, physician, supervisors, or nurses.[citation needed]

Obstetrics

[edit]

A maternal and newborn health practitioner is a health care expert who deals with the care of women and their children before, during and after pregnancy and childbirth. Such health practitioners include obstetricians, physician assistants, midwives, obstetrical nurses and many others. One of the main differences between these professions is in the training and authority to provide surgical services and other life-saving interventions.[7] In some developing countries, traditional birth attendants, or traditional midwives, are the primary source of pregnancy and childbirth care for many women and families, although they are not certified or licensed. According to research, rates for unhappiness among obstetrician-gynecologists (Ob-Gyns) range somewhere between 40 and 75 percent.[8]

Geriatrics

[edit]

A geriatric care practitioner plans and coordinates the care of the elderly and/or disabled to promote their health, improve their quality of life, and maintain their independence for as long as possible.[9] They include geriatricians, occupational therapists, physician assistants, adult-gerontology nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, geriatric clinical pharmacists, geriatric nurses, geriatric care managers, geriatric aides, nursing aides, caregivers and others who focus on the health and psychological care needs of older adults.[citation needed]

Surgery

[edit]

A surgical practitioner is a healthcare professional and expert who specializes in the planning and delivery of a patient's perioperative care, including during the anaesthetic, surgical and recovery stages. They may include general and specialist surgeons, physician assistants, assistant surgeons, surgical assistants, veterinary surgeons, veterinary technicians. anesthesiologists, anesthesiologist assistants, nurse anesthetists, surgical nurses, clinical officers, operating department practitioners, anaesthetic technicians, perioperative nurses, surgical technologists, and others.[citation needed]

Rehabilitation

[edit]

A rehabilitation care practitioner is a health worker who provides care and treatment which aims to enhance and restore functional ability and quality of life to those with physical impairments or disabilities. These include physiatrists, physician assistants, rehabilitation nurses, clinical nurse specialists, nurse practitioners, physiotherapists, chiropractors, orthotists, prosthetists, occupational therapists, recreational therapists, audiologists, speech and language pathologists, respiratory therapists, rehabilitation counsellors, physical rehabilitation therapists, athletic trainers, physiotherapy technicians, orthotic technicians, prosthetic technicians, personal care assistants, and others.[10]

Optometry

[edit]

Optometry is a field traditionally associated with the correction of refractive errors using glasses or contact lenses, and treating eye diseases. Optometrists also provide general eye care, including screening exams for glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy and management of routine or eye conditions. Optometrists may also undergo further training in order to specialize in various fields, including glaucoma, medical retina, low vision, or paediatrics. In some countries, such as the United Kingdom, United States, and Canada, Optometrists may also undergo further training in order to be able to perform some surgical procedures.

Diagnostics

[edit]

Medical diagnosis providers are health workers responsible for the process of determining which disease or condition explains a person's symptoms and signs. It is most often referred to as diagnosis with the medical context being implicit. This usually involves a team of healthcare providers in various diagnostic units. These include radiographers, radiologists, Sonographers, medical laboratory scientists, pathologists, and related professionals.[citation needed]

Dentistry

[edit]
Dental assistant on the right supporting a dental operator on the left, during a procedure.

A dental care practitioner is a health worker and expert who provides care and treatment to promote and restore oral health. These include dentists and dental surgeons, dental assistants, dental auxiliaries, dental hygienists, dental nurses, dental technicians, dental therapists or oral health therapists, and related professionals.

Podiatry

[edit]

Care and treatment for the foot, ankle, and lower leg may be delivered by podiatrists, chiropodists, pedorthists, foot health practitioners, podiatric medical assistants, podiatric nurse and others.

Public health

[edit]

A public health practitioner focuses on improving health among individuals, families and communities through the prevention and treatment of diseases and injuries, surveillance of cases, and promotion of healthy behaviors. This category includes community and preventive medicine specialists, physician assistants, public health nurses, pharmacist, clinical nurse specialists, dietitians, environmental health officers (public health inspectors), paramedics, epidemiologists, public health dentists, and others.[citation needed]

Alternative medicine

[edit]

In many societies, practitioners of alternative medicine have contact with a significant number of people, either as integrated within or remaining outside the formal health care system. These include practitioners in acupuncture, Ayurveda, herbalism, homeopathy, naturopathy, Reiki, Shamballa Reiki energy healing Archived 2021-01-25 at the Wayback Machine, Siddha medicine, traditional Chinese medicine, traditional Korean medicine, Unani, and Yoga. In some countries such as Canada, chiropractors and osteopaths (not to be confused with doctors of osteopathic medicine in the United States) are considered alternative medicine practitioners.

Occupational hazards

[edit]
A healthcare professional wears an air sampling device to investigate exposure to airborne influenza
A video describing the Occupational Health and Safety Network, a tool for monitoring occupational hazards to health care workers

The healthcare workforce faces unique health and safety challenges and is recognized by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) as a priority industry sector in the National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) to identify and provide intervention strategies regarding occupational health and safety issues.[11]

Biological hazards

[edit]

Exposure to respiratory infectious diseases like tuberculosis (caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis) and influenza can be reduced with the use of respirators; this exposure is a significant occupational hazard for health care professionals.[12] Healthcare workers are also at risk for diseases that are contracted through extended contact with a patient, including scabies.[13] Health professionals are also at risk for contracting blood-borne diseases like hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and HIV/AIDS through needlestick injuries or contact with bodily fluids.[14][15] This risk can be mitigated with vaccination when there is a vaccine available, like with hepatitis B.[15] In epidemic situations, such as the 2014-2016 West African Ebola virus epidemic or the 2003 SARS outbreak, healthcare workers are at even greater risk, and were disproportionately affected in both the Ebola and SARS outbreaks.[16]

In general, appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) is the first-line mode of protection for healthcare workers from infectious diseases. For it to be effective against highly contagious diseases, personal protective equipment must be watertight and prevent the skin and mucous membranes from contacting infectious material. Different levels of personal protective equipment created to unique standards are used in situations where the risk of infection is different. Practices such as triple gloving and multiple respirators do not provide a higher level of protection and present a burden to the worker, who is additionally at increased risk of exposure when removing the PPE. Compliance with appropriate personal protective equipment rules may be difficult in certain situations, such as tropical environments or low-resource settings. A 2020 Cochrane systematic review found low-quality evidence that using more breathable fabric in PPE, double gloving, and active training reduce the risk of contamination but that more randomized controlled trials are needed for how best to train healthcare workers in proper PPE use.[16]

Tuberculosis screening, testing, and education

[edit]

Based on recommendations from The United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for TB screening and testing the following best practices should be followed when hiring and employing Health Care Personnel.[17]

When hiring Health Care Personnel, the applicant should complete the following:[18] a TB risk assessment,[19] a TB symptom evaluation for at least those listed on the Signs & Symptoms page,[20] a TB test in accordance with the guidelines for Testing for TB Infection,[21] and additional evaluation for TB disease as needed (e.g. chest x-ray for HCP with a positive TB test)[18] The CDC recommends either a blood test, also known as an interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA), or a skin test, also known as a Mantoux tuberculin skin test (TST).[21] A TB blood test for baseline testing does not require two-step testing. If the skin test method is used to test HCP upon hire, then two-step testing should be used. A one-step test is not recommended.[18]

The CDC has outlined further specifics on recommended testing for several scenarios.[22] In summary:

  1. Previous documented positive skin test (TST) then a further TST is not recommended
  2. Previous documented negative TST within 12 months before employment OR at least two documented negative TSTs ever then a single TST is recommended
  3. All other scenarios, with the exception of programs using blood tests, the recommended testing is a two-step TST

According to these recommended testing guidelines any two negative TST results within 12 months of each other constitute a two-step TST.

For annual screening, testing, and education, the only recurring requirement for all HCP is to receive TB education annually.[18] While the CDC offers education materials, there is not a well defined requirement as to what constitutes a satisfactory annual education. Annual TB testing is no longer recommended unless there is a known exposure or ongoing transmission at a healthcare facility. Should an HCP be considered at increased occupational risk for TB annual screening may be considered. For HCP with a documented history of a positive TB test result do not need to be re-tested but should instead complete a TB symptom evaluation. It is assumed that any HCP who has undergone a chest x-ray test has had a previous positive test result. When considering mental health you may see your doctor to be evaluated at your digression. It is recommended to see someone at least once a year in order to make sure that there has not been any sudden changes.[23]

Psychosocial hazards

[edit]

Occupational stress and occupational burnout are highly prevalent among health professionals.[24] Some studies suggest that workplace stress is pervasive in the health care industry because of inadequate staffing levels, long work hours, exposure to infectious diseases and hazardous substances leading to illness or death, and in some countries threat of malpractice litigation. Other stressors include the emotional labor of caring for ill people and high patient loads. The consequences of this stress can include substance abuse, suicide, major depressive disorder, and anxiety, all of which occur at higher rates in health professionals than the general working population. Elevated levels of stress are also linked to high rates of burnout, absenteeism and diagnostic errors, and reduced rates of patient satisfaction.[25] In Canada, a national report (Canada's Health Care Providers) also indicated higher rates of absenteeism due to illness or disability among health care workers compared to the rest of the working population, although those working in health care reported similar levels of good health and fewer reports of being injured at work.[26]

There is some evidence that cognitive-behavioral therapy, relaxation training and therapy (including meditation and massage), and modifying schedules can reduce stress and burnout among multiple sectors of health care providers. Research is ongoing in this area, especially with regards to physicians, whose occupational stress and burnout is less researched compared to other health professions.[27]

Healthcare workers are at higher risk of on-the-job injury due to violence. Drunk, confused, and hostile patients and visitors are a continual threat to providers attempting to treat patients. Frequently, assault and violence in a healthcare setting goes unreported and is wrongly assumed to be part of the job.[28] Violent incidents typically occur during one-on-one care; being alone with patients increases healthcare workers' risk of assault.[29] In the United States, healthcare workers experience 23 of nonfatal workplace violence incidents.[28] Psychiatric units represent the highest proportion of violent incidents, at 40%; they are followed by geriatric units (20%) and the emergency department (10%). Workplace violence can also cause psychological trauma.[29]

Health care professionals are also likely to experience sleep deprivation due to their jobs. Many health care professionals are on a shift work schedule, and therefore experience misalignment of their work schedule and their circadian rhythm. In 2007, 32% of healthcare workers were found to get fewer than 6 hours of sleep a night. Sleep deprivation also predisposes healthcare professionals to make mistakes that may potentially endanger a patient.[30]

COVID pandemic

[edit]

Especially in times like the present (2020), the hazards of health professional stem into the mental health. Research from the last few months highlights that COVID-19 has contributed greatly  to the degradation of mental health in healthcare providers. This includes, but is not limited to, anxiety, depression/burnout, and insomnia.[citation needed]

A study done by Di Mattei et al. (2020) revealed that 12.63% of COVID nurses and 16.28% of other COVID healthcare workers reported extremely severe anxiety symptoms at the peak of the pandemic.[31] In addition, another study was conducted on 1,448 full time employees in Japan. The participants were surveyed at baseline in March 2020 and then again in May 2020. The result of the study showed that psychological distress and anxiety had increased more among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 outbreak.[32]

Similarly, studies have also shown that following the pandemic, at least one in five healthcare professionals report symptoms of anxiety.[33] Specifically, the aspect of "anxiety was assessed in 12 studies, with a pooled prevalence of 23.2%" following COVID.[33] When considering all 1,448 participants that percentage makes up about 335 people.

Abuse by patients

[edit]
  • The patients are selecting victims who are more vulnerable. For example, Cho said that these would be the nurses that are lacking experience or trying to get used to their new roles at work.[34]
  • Others authors that agree with this are Vento, Cainelli, & Vallone and they said that, the reason patients have caused danger to health care workers is because of insufficient communication between them, long waiting lines, and overcrowding in waiting areas.[35] When patients are intrusive and/or violent toward the faculty, this makes the staff question what they should do about taking care of a patient.
  • There have been many incidents from patients that have really caused some health care workers to be traumatized and have so much self doubt. Goldblatt and other authors  said that there was a lady who was giving birth, her husband said, "Who is in charge around here"? "Who are these sluts you employ here".[5]  This was very avoidable to have been said to the people who are taking care of your wife and child.

Physical and chemical hazards

[edit]

Slips, trips, and falls are the second-most common cause of worker's compensation claims in the US and cause 21% of work absences due to injury. These injuries most commonly result in strains and sprains; women, those older than 45, and those who have been working less than a year in a healthcare setting are at the highest risk.[36]

An epidemiological study published in 2018 examined the hearing status of noise-exposed health care and social assistance (HSA) workers sector to estimate and compare the prevalence of hearing loss by subsector within the sector. Most of the HSA subsector prevalence estimates ranged from 14% to 18%, but the Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories subsector had 31% prevalence and the Offices of All Other Miscellaneous Health Practitioners had a 24% prevalence. The Child Day Care Services subsector also had a 52% higher risk than the reference industry.[37]

Exposure to hazardous drugs, including those for chemotherapy, is another potential occupational risk. These drugs can cause cancer and other health conditions.[38]

Gender factors

[edit]

Female health care workers may face specific types of workplace-related health conditions and stress. According to the World Health Organization, women predominate in the formal health workforce in many countries and are prone to musculoskeletal injury (caused by physically demanding job tasks such as lifting and moving patients) and burnout. Female health workers are exposed to hazardous drugs and chemicals in the workplace which may cause adverse reproductive outcomes such as spontaneous abortion and congenital malformations. In some contexts, female health workers are also subject to gender-based violence from coworkers and patients.[39][40]

 

Workforce shortages

[edit]

Many jurisdictions report shortfalls in the number of trained health human resources to meet population health needs and/or service delivery targets, especially in medically underserved areas. For example, in the United States, the 2010 federal budget invested $330 million to increase the number of physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, nurses, and dentists practicing in areas of the country experiencing shortages of trained health professionals. The Budget expands loan repayment programs for physicians, nurses, and dentists who agree to practice in medically underserved areas. This funding will enhance the capacity of nursing schools to increase the number of nurses. It will also allow states to increase access to oral health care through dental workforce development grants. The Budget's new resources will sustain the expansion of the health care workforce funded in the Recovery Act.[41] There were 15.7 million health care professionals in the US as of 2011.[36]

In Canada, the 2011 federal budget announced a Canada Student Loan forgiveness program to encourage and support new family physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners and nurses to practice in underserved rural or remote communities of the country, including communities that provide health services to First Nations and Inuit populations.[42]

In Uganda, the Ministry of Health reports that as many as 50% of staffing positions for health workers in rural and underserved areas remain vacant. As of early 2011, the Ministry was conducting research and costing analyses to determine the most appropriate attraction and retention packages for medical officers, nursing officers, pharmacists, and laboratory technicians in the country's rural areas.[43]

At the international level, the World Health Organization estimates a shortage of almost 4.3 million doctors, midwives, nurses, and support workers worldwide to meet target coverage levels of essential primary health care interventions.[44] The shortage is reported most severe in 57 of the poorest countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa.

Nurses are the most common type of medical field worker to face shortages around the world. There are numerous reasons that the nursing shortage occurs globally. Some include: inadequate pay, a large percentage of working nurses are over the age of 45 and are nearing retirement age, burnout, and lack of recognition.[45]

Incentive programs have been put in place to aid in the deficit of pharmacists and pharmacy students. The reason for the shortage of pharmacy students is unknown but one can infer that it is due to the level of difficulty in the program.[46]

Results of nursing staff shortages can cause unsafe staffing levels that lead to poor patient care. Five or more incidents that occur per day in a hospital setting as a result of nurses who do not receive adequate rest or meal breaks is a common issue.[47]

Regulation and registration

[edit]

Practicing without a license that is valid and current is typically illegal. In most jurisdictions, the provision of health care services is regulated by the government. Individuals found to be providing medical, nursing or other professional services without the appropriate certification or license may face sanctions and criminal charges leading to a prison term. The number of professions subject to regulation, requisites for individuals to receive professional licensure, and nature of sanctions that can be imposed for failure to comply vary across jurisdictions.

In the United States, under Michigan state laws, an individual is guilty of a felony if identified as practicing in the health profession without a valid personal license or registration. Health professionals can also be imprisoned if found guilty of practicing beyond the limits allowed by their licenses and registration. The state laws define the scope of practice for medicine, nursing, and a number of allied health professions.[48][unreliable source?] In Florida, practicing medicine without the appropriate license is a crime classified as a third degree felony,[49] which may give imprisonment up to five years. Practicing a health care profession without a license which results in serious bodily injury classifies as a second degree felony,[49] providing up to 15 years' imprisonment.

In the United Kingdom, healthcare professionals are regulated by the state; the UK Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) protects the 'title' of each profession it regulates. For example, it is illegal for someone to call himself an Occupational Therapist or Radiographer if they are not on the register held by the HCPC.

See also

[edit]
  • List of healthcare occupations
  • Community health center
  • Chronic care management
  • Electronic superbill
  • Geriatric care management
  • Health human resources
  • Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioners Act

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "HCWs With Long COVID Report Doubt, Disbelief From Colleagues". Medscape. 29 November 2021.
  2. ^ World Health Organization, 2006. World Health Report 2006: working together for health. Geneva: WHO.
  3. ^ "Classifying health workers" (PDF). World Health Organization. Geneva. 2010. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-08-16. Retrieved 2016-02-13.
  4. ^ "Difference Between Psychologists and Psychiatrists". Psychology.about.com. 2007. Archived from the original on April 3, 2007. Retrieved March 4, 2007.
  5. ^ a b Goldblatt, Hadass; Freund, Anat; Drach-Zahavy, Anat; Enosh, Guy; Peterfreund, Ilana; Edlis, Neomi (2020-05-01). "Providing Health Care in the Shadow of Violence: Does Emotion Regulation Vary Among Hospital Workers From Different Professions?". Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 35 (9–10): 1908–1933. doi:10.1177/0886260517700620. ISSN 0886-2605. PMID 29294693. S2CID 19304885.
  6. ^ Johnson, Cheryl L.; DeMass Martin, Suzanne L.; Markle-Elder, Sara (April 2007). "Stopping Verbal Abuse in the Workplace". American Journal of Nursing. 107 (4): 32–34. doi:10.1097/01.naj.0000271177.59574.c5. ISSN 0002-936X. PMID 17413727.
  7. ^ Gupta N et al. "Human resources for maternal, newborn and child health: from measurement and planning to performance for improved health outcomes. Archived 2015-09-24 at the Wayback Machine Human Resources for Health, 2011, 9(16). Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  8. ^ "Ob-Gyn Burnout: Why So Many Doctors Are Questioning Their Calling". healthecareers.com. Retrieved 2023-05-22.
  9. ^ Araujo de Carvalho, Islene; Epping-Jordan, JoAnne; Pot, Anne Margriet; Kelley, Edward; Toro, Nuria; Thiyagarajan, Jotheeswaran A; Beard, John R (2017-11-01). "Organizing integrated health-care services to meet older people's needs". Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 95 (11): 756–763. doi:10.2471/BLT.16.187617 (inactive 5 December 2024). ISSN 0042-9686. PMC 5677611. PMID 29147056.cite journal: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of December 2024 (link)
  10. ^ Gupta N et al. "Health-related rehabilitation services: assessing the global supply of and need for human resources." Archived 2012-07-20 at the Wayback Machine BMC Health Services Research, 2011, 11:276. Published 17 October 2011. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  11. ^ "National Occupational Research Agenda for Healthcare and Social Assistance | NIOSH | CDC". www.cdc.gov. 2019-02-15. Retrieved 2019-03-14.
  12. ^ Bergman, Michael; Zhuang, Ziqing; Shaffer, Ronald E. (25 July 2013). "Advanced Headforms for Evaluating Respirator Fit". National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Archived from the original on 16 January 2015. Retrieved 18 January 2015.
  13. ^ FitzGerald, Deirdre; Grainger, Rachel J.; Reid, Alex (2014). "Interventions for preventing the spread of infestation in close contacts of people with scabies". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014 (2): CD009943. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009943.pub2. ISSN 1469-493X. PMC 10819104. PMID 24566946.
  14. ^ Cunningham, Thomas; Burnett, Garrett (17 May 2013). "Does your workplace culture help protect you from hepatitis?". National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Archived from the original on 18 January 2015. Retrieved 18 January 2015.
  15. ^ a b Reddy, Viraj K; Lavoie, Marie-Claude; Verbeek, Jos H; Pahwa, Manisha (14 November 2017). "Devices for preventing percutaneous exposure injuries caused by needles in healthcare personnel". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017 (11): CD009740. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009740.pub3. PMC 6491125. PMID 29190036.
  16. ^ a b Verbeek, Jos H.; Rajamaki, Blair; Ijaz, Sharea; Sauni, Riitta; Toomey, Elaine; Blackwood, Bronagh; Tikka, Christina; Ruotsalainen, Jani H.; Kilinc Balci, F. Selcen (May 15, 2020). "Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020 (5): CD011621. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011621.pub5. hdl:1983/b7069408-3bf6-457a-9c6f-ecc38c00ee48. ISSN 1469-493X. PMC 8785899. PMID 32412096. S2CID 218649177.
  17. ^ Sosa, Lynn E. (April 2, 2019). "Tuberculosis Screening, Testing, and Treatment of U.S. Health Care Personnel: Recommendations from the National Tuberculosis Controllers Association and CDC, 2019". MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 68 (19): 439–443. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6819a3. PMC 6522077. PMID 31099768.
  18. ^ a b c d "Testing Health Care Workers | Testing & Diagnosis | TB | CDC". www.cdc.gov. March 8, 2021.
  19. ^ "Health Care Personnel (HCP) Baseline Individual TB Risk Assessment" (PDF). cdc.gov. Retrieved 18 September 2022.
  20. ^ "Signs & Symptoms | Basic TB Facts | TB | CDC". www.cdc.gov. February 4, 2021.
  21. ^ a b "Testing for TB Infection | Testing & Diagnosis | TB | CDC". www.cdc.gov. March 8, 2021.
  22. ^ "Guidelines for Preventing the Transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Health-Care Settings, 2005". www.cdc.gov.
  23. ^ Spoorthy, Mamidipalli Sai; Pratapa, Sree Karthik; Mahant, Supriya (June 2020). "Mental health problems faced by healthcare workers due to the COVID-19 pandemic–A review". Asian Journal of Psychiatry. 51: 102119. doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102119. PMC 7175897. PMID 32339895.
  24. ^ Ruotsalainen, Jani H.; Verbeek, Jos H.; Mariné, Albert; Serra, Consol (2015-04-07). "Preventing occupational stress in healthcare workers". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015 (4): CD002892. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002892.pub5. ISSN 1469-493X. PMC 6718215. PMID 25847433.
  25. ^ "Exposure to Stress: Occupational Hazards in Hospitals". NIOSH Publication No. 2008–136 (July 2008). 2 December 2008. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB2008136. Archived from the original on 12 December 2008.
  26. ^ Canada's Health Care Providers, 2007 (Report). Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information. 2007. Archived from the original on 2011-09-27.
  27. ^ Ruotsalainen, JH; Verbeek, JH; Mariné, A; Serra, C (7 April 2015). "Preventing occupational stress in healthcare workers". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015 (4): CD002892. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002892.pub5. PMC 6718215. PMID 25847433.
  28. ^ a b Hartley, Dan; Ridenour, Marilyn (12 August 2013). "Free On-line Violence Prevention Training for Nurses". National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Archived from the original on 16 January 2015. Retrieved 15 January 2015.
  29. ^ a b Hartley, Dan; Ridenour, Marilyn (September 13, 2011). "Workplace Violence in the Healthcare Setting". NIOSH: Workplace Safety and Health. Medscape and NIOSH. Archived from the original on February 8, 2014.
  30. ^ Caruso, Claire C. (August 2, 2012). "Running on Empty: Fatigue and Healthcare Professionals". NIOSH: Workplace Safety and Health. Medscape and NIOSH. Archived from the original on May 11, 2013.
  31. ^ Di Mattei, Valentina; Perego, Gaia; Milano, Francesca; Mazzetti, Martina; Taranto, Paola; Di Pierro, Rossella; De Panfilis, Chiara; Madeddu, Fabio; Preti, Emanuele (2021-05-15). "The "Healthcare Workers' Wellbeing (Benessere Operatori)" Project: A Picture of the Mental Health Conditions of Italian Healthcare Workers during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 18 (10): 5267. doi:10.3390/ijerph18105267. ISSN 1660-4601. PMC 8156728. PMID 34063421.
  32. ^ Sasaki, Natsu; Kuroda, Reiko; Tsuno, Kanami; Kawakami, Norito (2020-11-01). "The deterioration of mental health among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 outbreak: A population-based cohort study of workers in Japan". Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health. 46 (6): 639–644. doi:10.5271/sjweh.3922. ISSN 0355-3140. PMC 7737801. PMID 32905601.
  33. ^ a b Pappa, Sofia; Ntella, Vasiliki; Giannakas, Timoleon; Giannakoulis, Vassilis G.; Papoutsi, Eleni; Katsaounou, Paraskevi (August 2020). "Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis". Brain, Behavior, and Immunity. 88: 901–907. doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.026. PMC 7206431. PMID 32437915.
  34. ^ Cho, Hyeonmi; Pavek, Katie; Steege, Linsey (2020-07-22). "Workplace verbal abuse, nurse-reported quality of care and patient safety outcomes among early-career hospital nurses". Journal of Nursing Management. 28 (6): 1250–1258. doi:10.1111/jonm.13071. ISSN 0966-0429. PMID 32564407. S2CID 219972442.
  35. ^ Vento, Sandro; Cainelli, Francesca; Vallone, Alfredo (2020-09-18). "Violence Against Healthcare Workers: A Worldwide Phenomenon With Serious Consequences". Frontiers in Public Health. 8: 570459. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.570459. ISSN 2296-2565. PMC 7531183. PMID 33072706.
  36. ^ a b Collins, James W.; Bell, Jennifer L. (June 11, 2012). "Slipping, Tripping, and Falling at Work". NIOSH: Workplace Safety and Health. Medscape and NIOSH. Archived from the original on December 3, 2012.
  37. ^ Masterson, Elizabeth A.; Themann, Christa L.; Calvert, Geoffrey M. (2018-04-15). "Prevalence of Hearing Loss Among Noise-Exposed Workers Within the Health Care and Social Assistance Sector, 2003 to 2012". Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 60 (4): 350–356. doi:10.1097/JOM.0000000000001214. ISSN 1076-2752. PMID 29111986. S2CID 4637417.
  38. ^ Connor, Thomas H. (March 7, 2011). "Hazardous Drugs in Healthcare". NIOSH: Workplace Safety and Health. Medscape and NIOSH. Archived from the original on March 7, 2012.
  39. ^ World Health Organization. Women and health: today's evidence, tomorrow's agenda. Archived 2012-12-25 at the Wayback Machine Geneva, 2009. Retrieved on March 9, 2011.
  40. ^ Swanson, Naomi; Tisdale-Pardi, Julie; MacDonald, Leslie; Tiesman, Hope M. (13 May 2013). "Women's Health at Work". National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Archived from the original on 18 January 2015. Retrieved 21 January 2015.
  41. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Office of Management and Budget. Retrieved 2009-03-06 – via National Archives.
  42. ^ Government of Canada. 2011. Canada's Economic Action Plan: Forgiving Loans for New Doctors and Nurses in Under-Served Rural and Remote Areas. Ottawa, 22 March 2011. Retrieved 23 March 2011.
  43. ^ Rockers P et al. Determining Priority Retention Packages to Attract and Retain Health Workers in Rural and Remote Areas in Uganda. Archived 2011-05-23 at the Wayback Machine CapacityPlus Project. February 2011.
  44. ^ "The World Health Report 2006 - Working together for health". Geneva: WHO: World Health Organization. 2006. Archived from the original on 2011-02-28.
  45. ^ Mefoh, Philip Chukwuemeka; Ude, Eze Nsi; Chukwuorji, JohBosco Chika (2019-01-02). "Age and burnout syndrome in nursing professionals: moderating role of emotion-focused coping". Psychology, Health & Medicine. 24 (1): 101–107. doi:10.1080/13548506.2018.1502457. ISSN 1354-8506. PMID 30095287. S2CID 51954488.
  46. ^ Traynor, Kate (2003-09-15). "Staffing shortages plague nation's pharmacy schools". American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 60 (18): 1822–1824. doi:10.1093/ajhp/60.18.1822. ISSN 1079-2082. PMID 14521029.
  47. ^ Leslie, G. D. (October 2008). "Critical Staffing shortage". Australian Nursing Journal. 16 (4): 16–17. doi:10.1016/s1036-7314(05)80033-5. ISSN 1036-7314. PMID 14692155.
  48. ^ wiki.bmezine.com --> Practicing Medicine. In turn citing Michigan laws
  49. ^ a b CHAPTER 2004-256 Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1118 Archived 2011-07-23 at the Wayback Machine State of Florida, Department of State.
[edit]
  • World Health Organization: Health workers

 

Malocclusion
Malocclusion in 10-year-old girl
Specialty Dentistry Edit this on Wikidata

In orthodontics, a malocclusion is a misalignment or incorrect relation between the teeth of the upper and lower dental arches when they approach each other as the jaws close. The English-language term dates from 1864;[1] Edward Angle (1855–1930), the "father of modern orthodontics",[2][3][need quotation to verify] popularised it. The word derives from mal- 'incorrect' and occlusion 'the manner in which opposing teeth meet'.

The malocclusion classification is based on the relationship of the mesiobuccal cusp of the maxillary first molar and the buccal groove of the mandibular first molar.  If this molar relationship exists, then the teeth can align into normal occlusion. According to Angle, malocclusion is any deviation of the occlusion from the ideal.[4] However, assessment for malocclusion should also take into account aesthetics and the impact on functionality. If these aspects are acceptable to the patient despite meeting the formal definition of malocclusion, then treatment may not be necessary. It is estimated that nearly 30% of the population have malocclusions that are categorised as severe and definitely benefit from orthodontic treatment.[5]

Causes

[edit]

The aetiology of malocclusion is somewhat contentious, however, simply put it is multifactorial, with influences being both genetic[6][unreliable source?] and environmental.[7] Malocclusion is already present in one of the Skhul and Qafzeh hominin fossils and other prehistoric human skulls.[8][9] There are three generally accepted causative factors of malocclusion:

  • Skeletal factors – the size, shape and relative positions of the upper and lower jaws. Variations can be caused by environmental or behavioral factors such as muscles of mastication, nocturnal mouth breathing, and cleft lip and cleft palate.
  • Muscle factors – the form and function of the muscles that surround the teeth.  This could be impacted by habits such as finger sucking, nail biting, pacifier and tongue thrusting[10]
  • Dental factors – size of the teeth in relation to the jaw, early loss of teeth could result in spacing or mesial migration causing crowding, abnormal eruption path or timings, extra teeth (supernumeraries), or too few teeth (hypodontia)

There is not one single cause of malocclusion, and when planning orthodontic treatment it is often helpful to consider the above factors and the impact they have played on malocclusion. These can also be influenced by oral habits and pressure resulting in malocclusion.[11][12]

Behavioral and dental factors

[edit]

In the active skeletal growth,[13] mouthbreathing, finger sucking, thumb sucking, pacifier sucking, onychophagia (nail biting), dermatophagia, pen biting, pencil biting, abnormal posture, deglutition disorders and other habits greatly influence the development of the face and dental arches.[14][15][16][17][18] Pacifier sucking habits are also correlated with otitis media.[19][20] Dental caries, periapical inflammation and tooth loss in the deciduous teeth can alter the correct permanent teeth eruptions.

Primary vs. secondary dentition

[edit]

Malocclusion can occur in primary and secondary dentition.

In primary dentition malocclusion is caused by:

  • Underdevelopment of the dentoalvelor tissue.
  • Over development of bones around the mouth.
  • Cleft lip and palate.
  • Overcrowding of teeth.
  • Abnormal development and growth of teeth.

In secondary dentition malocclusion is caused by:

  • Periodontal disease.
  • Overeruption of teeth.[21]
  • Premature and congenital loss of missing teeth.

Signs and symptoms

[edit]

Malocclusion is a common finding,[22][23] although it is not usually serious enough to require treatment. Those who have more severe malocclusions, which present as a part of craniofacial anomalies, may require orthodontic and sometimes surgical treatment (orthognathic surgery) to correct the problem.

The ultimate goal of orthodontic treatment is to achieve a stable, functional and aesthetic alignment of teeth which serves to better the patient's dental and total health.[24] The symptoms which arise as a result of malocclusion derive from a deficiency in one or more of these categories.[25]

The symptoms are as follows:

  • Tooth decay (caries): misaligned teeth will make it more difficult to maintain oral hygiene. Children with poor oral hygiene and diet will be at an increased risk.
  • Periodontal disease: irregular teeth would hinder the ability to clean teeth meaning poor plaque control. Additionally, if teeth are crowded, some may be more buccally or lingually placed, there will be reduced bone and periodontal support. Furthermore, in Class III malocclusions, mandibular anterior teeth are pushed labially which contributes to gingival recession and weakens periodontal support.
  • Trauma to anterior teeth: Those with an increased overjet are at an increased risk of trauma. A systematic review found that an overjet of greater than 3mm will double the risk of trauma.
  • Masticatory function: people with anterior open bites, large increased & reverse overjet and hypodontia will find it more difficult to chew food.
  • Speech impairment: a lisp is when the incisors cannot make contact, orthodontics can treat this. However, other forms of misaligned teeth will have little impact on speech and orthodontic treatment has little effect on fixing any problems.  
  • Tooth impaction: these can cause resorption of adjacent teeth and other pathologies for example a dentigerous cyst formation.  
  • Psychosocial wellbeing: malocclusions of teeth with poor aesthetics can have a significant effect on self-esteem.

Malocclusions may be coupled with skeletal disharmony of the face, where the relations between the upper and lower jaws are not appropriate. Such skeletal disharmonies often distort sufferer's face shape, severely affect aesthetics of the face, and may be coupled with mastication or speech problems. Most skeletal malocclusions can only be treated by orthognathic surgery.[citation needed]

Classification

[edit]

Depending on the sagittal relations of teeth and jaws, malocclusions can be divided mainly into three types according to Angle's classification system published 1899. However, there are also other conditions, e.g. crowding of teeth, not directly fitting into this classification.

Many authors have tried to modify or replace Angle's classification. This has resulted in many subtypes and new systems (see section below: Review of Angle's system of classes).

A deep bite (also known as a Type II Malocclusion) is a condition in which the upper teeth overlap the lower teeth, which can result in hard and soft tissue trauma, in addition to an effect on appearance.[26] It has been found to occur in 15–20% of the US population.[27]

An open bite is a condition characterised by a complete lack of overlap and occlusion between the upper and lower incisors.[28] In children, open bite can be caused by prolonged thumb sucking.[29] Patients often present with impaired speech and mastication.[30]

Overbites

[edit]

This is a vertical measurement of the degree of overlap between the maxillary incisors and the mandibular incisors. There are three features that are analysed in the classification of an overbite:

  • Degree of overlap: edge to edge, reduced, average, increased
  • Complete or incomplete: whether there is contact between the lower teeth and the opposing teeth/tissue (hard palate or gingivae) or not.
  • Whether contact is traumatic or atraumatic

An average overbite is when the upper anterior teeth cover a third of the lower teeth. Covering less than this is described as ‘reduced’ and more than this is an ‘increased’ overbite. No overlap or contact is considered an ‘anterior open bite’.[25][31][32]

Angle's classification method

[edit]
Class I with severe crowding and labially erupted canines
Class II molar relationship

Edward Angle, who is considered the father of modern orthodontics, was the first to classify malocclusion. He based his classifications on the relative position of the maxillary first molar.[33] According to Angle, the mesiobuccal cusp of the upper first molar should align with the buccal groove of the mandibular first molar. The teeth should all fit on a line of occlusion which, in the upper arch, is a smooth curve through the central fossae of the posterior teeth and cingulum of the canines and incisors, and in the lower arch, is a smooth curve through the buccal cusps of the posterior teeth and incisal edges of the anterior teeth. Any variations from this resulted in malocclusion types. It is also possible to have different classes of malocclusion on left and right sides.

  • Class I (Neutrocclusion): Here the molar relationship of the occlusion is normal but the incorrect line of occlusion or as described for the maxillary first molar, but the other teeth have problems like spacing, crowding, over or under eruption, etc.
  • Class II (Distocclusion (retrognathism, overjet, overbite)): In this situation, the mesiobuccal cusp of the upper first molar is not aligned with the mesiobuccal groove of the lower first molar. Instead it is anterior to it. Usually the mesiobuccal cusp rests in between the first mandibular molars and second premolars. There are two subtypes:
    • Class II Division 1: The molar relationships are like that of Class II and the anterior teeth are protruded.
    • Class II Division 2: The molar relationships are Class II but the central are retroclined and the lateral teeth are seen overlapping the centrals.
  • Class III: (Mesiocclusion (prognathism, anterior crossbite, negative overjet, underbite)) In this case the upper molars are placed not in the mesiobuccal groove but posteriorly to it. The mesiobuccal cusp of the maxillary first molar lies posteriorly to the mesiobuccal groove of the mandibular first molar. Usually seen as when the lower front teeth are more prominent than the upper front teeth. In this case the patient very often has a large mandible or a short maxillary bone.

Review of Angle's system of classes and alternative systems

[edit]

A major disadvantage of Angle's system of classifying malocclusions is that it only considers two dimensions along a spatial axis in the sagittal plane in the terminal occlusion, but occlusion problems can be three-dimensional. It does not recognise deviations in other spatial axes, asymmetric deviations, functional faults and other therapy-related features.

Angle's classification system also lacks a theoretical basis; it is purely descriptive. Its much-discussed weaknesses include that it only considers static occlusion, it does not account for the development and causes (aetiology) of occlusion problems, and it disregards the proportions (or relationships in general) of teeth and face.[34] Thus, many attempts have been made to modify the Angle system or to replace it completely with a more efficient one,[35] but Angle's classification continues be popular mainly because of its simplicity and clarity.[citation needed]

Well-known modifications to Angle's classification date back to Martin Dewey (1915) and Benno Lischer (1912, 1933). Alternative systems have been suggested by, among others, Simon (1930, the first three-dimensional classification system), Jacob A. Salzmann (1950, with a classification system based on skeletal structures) and James L. Ackerman and William R. Proffit (1969).[36]

Incisor classification

[edit]

Besides the molar relationship, the British Standards Institute Classification also classifies malocclusion into incisor relationship and canine relationship.

  • Class I: The lower incisor edges occlude with or lie immediately below the cingulum plateau of the upper central incisors
  • Class II: The lower incisor edges lie posterior to the cingulum plateau of the upper incisors
    • Division 1 – the upper central incisors are proclined or of average inclination and there is an increase in overjet
    • Division 2 – The upper central incisors are retroclined. The overjet is usually minimal or may be increased.
  • Class III: The lower incisor edges lie anterior to the cingulum plateau of the upper incisors. The overjet is reduced or reversed.

Canine relationship by Ricketts

[edit]
  • Class I: Mesial slope of upper canine coincides with distal slope of lower canine
  • Class II: Mesial slope of upper canine is ahead of distal slope of lower canine
  • Class III: Mesial slope of upper canine is behind to distal slope of lower canine

Crowding of teeth

[edit]

Dental crowding is defined by the amount of space that would be required for the teeth to be in correct alignment. It is obtained in two ways: 1) by measuring the amount of space required and reducing this from calculating the space available via the width of the teeth, or 2) by measuring the degree of overlap of the teeth.

The following criterion is used:[25]

  • 0-4mm = Mild crowding
  • 4-8mm = Moderate crowding
  • >8mm = Severe crowding

Causes

[edit]

Genetic (inheritance) factors, extra teeth, lost teeth, impacted teeth, or abnormally shaped teeth have been cited as causes of crowding. Ill-fitting dental fillings, crowns, appliances, retainers, or braces as well as misalignment of jaw fractures after a severe injury are also known to cause crowding.[26] Tumors of the mouth and jaw, thumb sucking, tongue thrusting, pacifier use beyond age three, and prolonged use of a bottle have also been identified.[26]

Lack of masticatory stress during development can cause tooth overcrowding.[37][38] Children who chewed a hard resinous gum for two hours a day showed increased facial growth.[37] Experiments in animals have shown similar results. In an experiment on two groups of rock hyraxes fed hardened or softened versions of the same foods, the animals fed softer food had significantly narrower and shorter faces and thinner and shorter mandibles than animals fed hard food.[37][39][failed verification]

A 2016 review found that breastfeeding lowers the incidence of malocclusions developing later on in developing infants.[40]

During the transition to agriculture, the shape of the human mandible went through a series of changes. The mandible underwent a complex shape changes not matched by the teeth, leading to incongruity between the dental and mandibular form. These changes in human skulls may have been "driven by the decreasing bite forces required to chew the processed foods eaten once humans switched to growing different types of cereals, milking and herding animals about 10,000 years ago."[38][41]

Treatment

[edit]

Orthodontic management of the condition includes dental braces, lingual braces, clear aligners or palatal expanders.[42] Other treatments include the removal of one or more teeth and the repair of injured teeth. In some cases, surgery may be necessary.[43]

Treatment

[edit]

Malocclusion is often treated with orthodontics,[42] such as tooth extraction, clear aligners, or dental braces,[44] followed by growth modification in children or jaw surgery (orthognathic surgery) in adults. Surgical intervention is used only in rare occasions. This may include surgical reshaping to lengthen or shorten the jaw. Wires, plates, or screws may be used to secure the jaw bone, in a manner like the surgical stabilization of jaw fractures. Very few people have "perfect" alignment of their teeth with most problems being minor that do not require treatment.[37]

Crowding

[edit]

Crowding of the teeth is treated with orthodontics, often with tooth extraction, clear aligners, or dental braces, followed by growth modification in children or jaw surgery (orthognathic surgery) in adults. Surgery may be required on rare occasions. This may include surgical reshaping to lengthen or shorten the jaw (orthognathic surgery). Wires, plates, or screws may be used to secure the jaw bone, in a manner similar to the surgical stabilization of jaw fractures. Very few people have "perfect" alignment of their teeth. However, most problems are very minor and do not require treatment.[39]

Class I

[edit]

While treatment is not crucial in class I malocclusions, in severe cases of crowding can be an indication for intervention. Studies indicate that tooth extraction can have benefits to correcting malocclusion in individuals.[45][46] Further research is needed as reoccurring crowding has been examined in other clinical trials.[45][47]

Class II

[edit]

A few treatment options for class II malocclusions include:

  1. Functional appliance which maintains the mandible in a postured position to influence both the orofacial musculature and dentoalveolar development prior to fixed appliance therapy. This is ideally done through pubertal growth in pre-adolescent children and the fixed appliance during permanent dentition .[48] Different types of removable appliances include Activator, Bionatar, Medium opening activator, Herbst, Frankel and twin block appliance with the twin block being the most widely used one.[49]
  2. Growth modification through headgear to redirect maxillary growth
  3. Orthodontic camouflage so that jaw discrepancy no longer apparent
  4. Orthognathic surgery – sagittal split osteotomy mandibular advancement carried out when growth is complete where skeletal discrepancy is severe in anterior-posterior relationship or in vertical direction. Fixed appliance is required before, during and after surgery.
  5. Upper Removable Appliance – limited role in contemporary treatment of increased overjets. Mostly used for very mild Class II, overjet due to incisor proclination, favourable overbite.

Class II Division 1

[edit]

Low- to moderate- quality evidence suggests that providing early orthodontic treatment for children with prominent upper front teeth (class II division 1) is more effective for reducing the incidence of incisal trauma than providing one course of orthodontic treatment in adolescence.[50] There do not appear to be any other advantages of providing early treatment when compared to late treatment.[50] Low-quality evidence suggests that, compared to no treatment, late treatment in adolescence with functional appliances is effective for reducing the prominence of upper front teeth.[50]

Class II Division 2

[edit]

Treatment can be undertaken using orthodontic treatments using dental braces.[51] While treatment is carried out, there is no evidence from clinical trials to recommend or discourage any type of orthodontic treatment in children.[51] A 2018 Cochrane systematic review anticipated that the evidence base supporting treatment approaches is not likely to improve occlusion due to the low prevalence of the condition and the ethical difficulties in recruiting people to participate in a randomized controlled trials for treating this condition.[51]

Class III

[edit]

The British Standard Institute (BSI) classify class III incisor relationship as the lower incisor edge lies anterior to the cingulum plateau of the upper incisors, with reduced or reversed over jet.[52] The skeletal facial deformity is characterized by mandibular prognathism, maxillary retrognathism or a combination of the two. This effects 3-8% of UK population with a higher incidence seen in Asia.[53]

One of the main reasons for correcting Class III malocclusion is aesthetics and function. This can have a psychological impact on the person with malocclusion resulting in speech and mastication problems as well. In mild class III cases, the patient is quite accepting of the aesthetics and the situation is monitored to observe the progression of skeletal growth.[54]

Maxillary and mandibular skeletal changes during prepubertal, pubertal and post pubertal stages show that class III malocclusion is established before the prepubertal stage.[55] One treatment option is the use of growth modification appliances such as the Chin Cap which has greatly improved the skeletal framework in the initial stages. However, majority of cases are shown to relapse into inherited class III malocclusion during the pubertal growth stage and when the appliance is removed after treatment.[55]

Another approach is to carry out orthognathic surgery, such as a bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) which is indicated by horizontal mandibular excess. This involves surgically cutting through the mandible and moving the fragment forward or backwards for desired function and is supplemented with pre and post surgical orthodontics to ensure correct tooth relationship. Although the most common surgery of the mandible, it comes with several complications including: bleeding from inferior alveolar artery, unfavorable splits, condylar resorption, avascular necrosis and worsening of temporomandibular joint.[56]

Orthodontic camouflage can also be used in patients with mild skeletal discrepancies. This is a less invasive approach that uses orthodontic brackets to correct malocclusion and try to hide the skeletal discrepancy. Due to limitations of orthodontics, this option is more viable for patients who are not as concerned about the aesthetics of their facial appearance and are happy to address the malocclusion only, as well as avoiding the risks which come with orthognathic surgery. Cephalometric data can aid in the differentiation between the cases that benefit from ortho-surgical or orthodontic treatment only (camouflage); for instance, examining a large group of orthognathic patient with Class III malocclusions they had average ANB angle of -3.57° (95% CI, -3.92° to -3.21°). [57]

Deep bite

[edit]

The most common corrective treatments available are fixed or removal appliances (such as dental braces), which may or may not require surgical intervention. At this time there is no robust evidence that treatment will be successful.[51]

Open bite

[edit]

An open bite malocclusion is when the upper teeth don't overlap the lower teeth. When this malocclusion occurs at the front teeth it is known as anterior open bite. An open bite is difficult to treat due to multifactorial causes, with relapse being a major concern. This is particularly so for an anterior open bite.[58] Therefore, it is important to carry out a thorough initial assessment in order to obtain a diagnosis to tailor a suitable treatment plan.[58] It is important to take into consideration any habitual risk factors, as this is crucial for a successful outcome without relapse. Treatment approach includes behavior changes, appliances and surgery. Treatment for adults include a combination of extractions, fixed appliances, intermaxillary elastics and orthognathic surgery.[30] For children, orthodontics is usually used to compensate for continued growth. With children with mixed dentition, the malocclusion may resolve on its own as the permanent teeth erupt. Furthermore, should the malocclusion be caused by childhood habits such as digit, thumb or pacifier sucking, it may result in resolution as the habit is stopped. Habit deterrent appliances may be used to help in breaking digit and thumb sucking habits. Other treatment options for patients who are still growing include functional appliances and headgear appliances.

Tooth size discrepancy

[edit]

Identifying the presence of tooth size discrepancies between the maxillary and mandibular arches is an important component of correct orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.

To establish appropriate alignment and occlusion, the size of upper and lower front teeth, or upper and lower teeth in general, needs to be proportional. Inter-arch tooth size discrepancy (ITSD) is defined as a disproportion in the mesio-distal dimensions of teeth of opposing dental arches. The prevalence is clinically significant among orthodontic patients and has been reported to range from 17% to 30%.[59]

Identifying inter-arch tooth size discrepancy (ITSD) before treatment begins allows the practitioner to develop the treatment plan in a way that will take ITSD into account. ITSD corrective treatment may entail demanding reduction (interproximal wear), increase (crowns and resins), or elimination (extractions) of dental mass prior to treatment finalization.[60]

Several methods have been used to determine ITSD. Of these methods the one most commonly used is the Bolton analysis. Bolton developed a method to calculate the ratio between the mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular teeth and stated that a correct and harmonious occlusion is possible only with adequate proportionality of tooth sizes.[60] Bolton's formula concludes that if in the anterior portion the ratio is less than 77.2% the lower teeth are too narrow, the upper teeth are too wide or there is a combination of both. If the ratio is higher than 77.2% either the lower teeth are too wide, the upper teeth are too narrow or there is a combination of both.[59]

Other conditions

[edit]
Open bite treatment after eight months of braces.

Other kinds of malocclusions can be due to or horizontal, vertical, or transverse skeletal discrepancies, including skeletal asymmetries.

Increased vertical growth causes a long facial profile and commonly leads to an open bite malocclusion, while decreased vertical facial growth causes a short facial profile and is commonly associated with a deep bite malocclusion. However, there are many other more common causes for open bites (such as tongue thrusting and thumb sucking) and likewise for deep bites.[61][62][63]

The upper or lower jaw can be overgrown (macrognathia) or undergrown (micrognathia).[62][61][63] It has been reported that patients with micrognathia are also affected by retrognathia (abnormal posterior positioning of the mandible or maxilla relative to the facial structure).[62]  These patients are majorly predisposed to a class II malocclusion. Mandibular macrognathia results in prognathism and predisposes patients to a class III malocclusion.[64]

Most malocclusion studies to date have focused on Class III malocclusions. Genetic studies for Class II and Class I malocclusion are more rare. An example of hereditary mandibular prognathism can be seen amongst the Hapsburg Royal family where one third of the affected individuals with severe class III malocclusion had one parent with a similar phenotype [65]

The frequent presentation of dental malocclusions in patients with craniofacial birth defects also supports a strong genetic aetiology. About 150 genes are associated with craniofacial conditions presenting with malocclusions.[66]  Micrognathia is a commonly recurring craniofacial birth defect appearing among multiple syndromes.

For patients with severe malocclusions, corrective jaw surgery or orthognathic surgery may be carried out as a part of overall treatment, which can be seen in about 5% of the general population.[62][61][63]

See also

[edit]
  • Crossbite
  • Elastics
  • Facemask (orthodontics)
  • Maximum intercuspation
  • Mouth breathing
  • Occlusion (dentistry)

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "malocclusion". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
  2. ^ Bell B (September 1965). "Paul G. Spencer". American Journal of Orthodontics. 51 (9): 693–694. doi:10.1016/0002-9416(65)90262-9. PMID 14334001.
  3. ^ Gruenbaum T (2010). "Famous Figures in Dentistry". Mouth – JASDA. 30 (1): 18.
  4. ^ Hurt MA (2012). "Weedon D. Weedon's Skin Pathology. 3rd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, 2010". Dermatology Practical & Conceptual. 2 (1): 79–82. doi:10.5826/dpc.0201a15. PMC 3997252.
  5. ^ Borzabadi-Farahani, A (2011). "An Overview of Selected Orthodontic Treatment Need Indices". In Naretto, Silvano (ed.). Principles in Contemporary Orthodontics. IntechOpen Limited. pp. 215–236. doi:10.5772/19735. ISBN 978-953-307-687-4.
  6. ^ "How genetics can affect your teeth". Orthodontics Australia. 2018-11-25. Retrieved 2020-11-16.
  7. ^ Corruccini RS, Potter RH (August 1980). "Genetic analysis of occlusal variation in twins". American Journal of Orthodontics. 78 (2): 140–54. doi:10.1016/0002-9416(80)90056-1. PMID 6931485.
  8. ^ Sarig, Rachel; Slon, Viviane; Abbas, Janan; May, Hila; Shpack, Nir; Vardimon, Alexander Dan; Hershkovitz, Israel (2013-11-20). "Malocclusion in Early Anatomically Modern Human: A Reflection on the Etiology of Modern Dental Misalignment". PLOS ONE. 8 (11): e80771. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...880771S. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0080771. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 3835570. PMID 24278319.
  9. ^ Pajević, Tina; Juloski, Jovana; Glišić, Branislav (2019-08-29). "Malocclusion from the prehistoric to the medieval times in Serbian population: Dentoalveolar and skeletal relationship comparisons in samples". Homo: Internationale Zeitschrift für die vergleichende Forschung am Menschen. 70 (1): 31–43. doi:10.1127/homo/2019/1009. ISSN 1618-1301. PMID 31475289. S2CID 201203069.
  10. ^ Moimaz SA, Garbin AJ, Lima AM, Lolli LF, Saliba O, Garbin CA (August 2014). "Longitudinal study of habits leading to malocclusion development in childhood". BMC Oral Health. 14 (1): 96. doi:10.1186/1472-6831-14-96. PMC 4126276. PMID 25091288.
  11. ^ Klein ET (1952). "Pressure Habits, Etiological Factors in Malocclusion". Am. J. Orthod. 38 (8): 569–587. doi:10.1016/0002-9416(52)90025-0.
  12. ^ Graber TM. (1963). "The "Three m's": Muscles, Malformation and Malocclusion". Am. J. Orthod. 49 (6): 418–450. doi:10.1016/0002-9416(63)90167-2. hdl:2027.42/32220. S2CID 57626540.
  13. ^ Björk A, Helm S (April 1967). "Prediction of the age of maximum puberal growth in body height" (PDF). The Angle Orthodontist. 37 (2): 134–43. PMID 4290545.
  14. ^ Brucker M (1943). "Studies on the Incidence and Cause of Dental Defects in Children: IV. Malocclusion" (PDF). J Dent Res. 22 (4): 315–321. doi:10.1177/00220345430220041201. S2CID 71368994.
  15. ^ Calisti LJ, Cohen MM, Fales MH (1960). "Correlation between malocclusion, oral habits, and socio-economic level of preschool children". Journal of Dental Research. 39 (3): 450–4. doi:10.1177/00220345600390030501. PMID 13806967. S2CID 39619434.
  16. ^ Subtelny JD, Subtelny JD (October 1973). "Oral habits--studies in form, function, and therapy". The Angle Orthodontist. 43 (4): 349–83. PMID 4583311.
  17. ^ Aznar T, Galán AF, Marín I, Domínguez A (May 2006). "Dental arch diameters and relationships to oral habits". The Angle Orthodontist. 76 (3): 441–5. PMID 16637724.
  18. ^ Yamaguchi H, Sueishi K (May 2003). "Malocclusion associated with abnormal posture". The Bulletin of Tokyo Dental College. 44 (2): 43–54. doi:10.2209/tdcpublication.44.43. PMID 12956088.
  19. ^ Wellington M, Hall CB (February 2002). "Pacifier as a risk factor for acute otitis media". Pediatrics. 109 (2): 351–2, author reply 353. doi:10.1542/peds.109.2.351. PMID 11826228.
  20. ^ Rovers MM, Numans ME, Langenbach E, Grobbee DE, Verheij TJ, Schilder AG (August 2008). "Is pacifier use a risk factor for acute otitis media? A dynamic cohort study". Family Practice. 25 (4): 233–6. doi:10.1093/fampra/cmn030. PMID 18562333.
  21. ^ Hamish T (1990). Occlusion. Parkins, B. J. (2nd ed.). London: Wright. ISBN 978-0723620754. OCLC 21226656.
  22. ^ Thilander B, Pena L, Infante C, Parada SS, de Mayorga C (April 2001). "Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in children and adolescents in Bogota, Colombia. An epidemiological study related to different stages of dental development". European Journal of Orthodontics. 23 (2): 153–67. doi:10.1093/ejo/23.2.153. PMID 11398553.
  23. ^ Borzabadi-Farahani A, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Eslamipour F (October 2009). "Malocclusion and occlusal traits in an urban Iranian population. An epidemiological study of 11- to 14-year-old children". European Journal of Orthodontics. 31 (5): 477–84. doi:10.1093/ejo/cjp031. PMID 19477970.
  24. ^ "5 reasons you should see an orthodontist". Orthodontics Australia. 2017-09-27. Retrieved 2020-08-18.
  25. ^ a b c Oliver RG (December 2001). "An Introduction to Orthodontics, 2nd edn". Journal of Orthodontics. 28 (4): 320. doi:10.1093/ortho/28.4.320.
  26. ^ a b c Millett DT, Cunningham SJ, O'Brien KD, Benson PE, de Oliveira CM (February 2018). "Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2 (3): CD005972. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005972.pub4. PMC 6491166. PMID 29390172.
  27. ^ Brunelle JA, Bhat M, Lipton JA (February 1996). "Prevalence and distribution of selected occlusal characteristics in the US population, 1988-1991". Journal of Dental Research. 75 Spec No (2 Suppl): 706–13. doi:10.1177/002203459607502S10. PMID 8594094. S2CID 30447284.
  28. ^ de Castilho LS, Abreu MH, Pires e Souza LG, Romualdo LT, Souza e Silva ME, Resende VL (January 2018). "Factors associated with anterior open bite in children with developmental disabilities". Special Care in Dentistry. 38 (1): 46–50. doi:10.1111/scd.12262. PMID 29278267. S2CID 42747680.
  29. ^ Feres MF, Abreu LG, Insabralde NM, Almeida MR, Flores-Mir C (June 2016). "Effectiveness of the open bite treatment in growing children and adolescents. A systematic review". European Journal of Orthodontics. 38 (3): 237–50. doi:10.1093/ejo/cjv048. PMC 4914905. PMID 26136439.
  30. ^ a b Cambiano AO, Janson G, Lorenzoni DC, Garib DG, Dávalos DT (2018). "Nonsurgical treatment and stability of an adult with a severe anterior open-bite malocclusion". Journal of Orthodontic Science. 7: 2. doi:10.4103/jos.JOS_69_17. PMC 5952238. PMID 29765914.
  31. ^ Houston, W. J. B. (1992-02-01). "Book Reviews". The European Journal of Orthodontics. 14 (1): 69. doi:10.1093/ejo/14.1.69.
  32. ^ Hamdan AM, Lewis SM, Kelleher KE, Elhady SN, Lindauer SJ (November 2019). "Does overbite reduction affect smile esthetics?". The Angle Orthodontist. 89 (6): 847–854. doi:10.2319/030819-177.1. PMC 8109173. PMID 31306077.
  33. ^ "Angle's Classification of Malocclusion". Archived from the original on 2008-02-13. Retrieved 2007-10-31.
  34. ^ Sunil Kumar (Ed.): Orthodontics. New Delhi 2008, 624 p., ISBN 978-81-312-1054-3, p. 127
  35. ^ Sunil Kumar (Ed.): Orthodontics. New Delhi 2008, p. 123. A list of 18 approaches to modify or replace Angle's system is given here with further references at the end of the book.
  36. ^ Gurkeerat Singh: Textbook of Orthodontics, p. 163-170, with further references on p. 174.
  37. ^ a b c d Lieberman, D (May 2004). "Effects of food processing on masticatory strain and craniofacial growth in a retrognathic face". Journal of Human Evolution. 46 (6): 655–77. doi:10.1016/s0047-2484(04)00051-x. PMID 15183669.
  38. ^ a b Ingervall B, Bitsanis E (February 1987). "A pilot study of the effect of masticatory muscle training on facial growth in long-face children" (PDF). European Journal of Orthodontics. 9 (1): 15–23. doi:10.1093/ejo/9.1.15. PMID 3470182.
  39. ^ a b Rosenberg J (2010-02-22). "Malocclusion of teeth". Medline Plus. Retrieved 2012-02-06.
  40. ^ Victora CG, Bahl R, Barros AJ, França GV, Horton S, Krasevec J, Murch S, Sankar MJ, Walker N, Rollins NC (January 2016). "Breastfeeding in the 21st century: epidemiology, mechanisms, and lifelong effect". Lancet. 387 (10017): 475–90. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)01024-7. PMID 26869575.
  41. ^ Quaglio CL, de Freitas KM, de Freitas MR, Janson G, Henriques JF (June 2011). "Stability and relapse of maxillary anterior crowding treatment in class I and class II Division 1 malocclusions". American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 139 (6): 768–74. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.10.044. PMID 21640883.
  42. ^ a b "Dental Crowding: Causes and Treatment Options". Orthodontics Australia. 2020-06-29. Retrieved 2020-11-19.
  43. ^ "Malocclusion of teeth: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia". medlineplus.gov. Retrieved 2021-04-07.
  44. ^ "Can Buck Teeth Be Fixed? Causes & Treatment Options". Orthodontics Australia. 2021-07-01. Retrieved 2021-10-11.
  45. ^ a b Alam, MK (October 2018). "Treatment of Angle Class I malocclusion with severe crowding by extraction of four premolars: a case report". Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science. 17 (4): 683–687. doi:10.3329/bjms.v17i4.38339.
  46. ^ Persson M, Persson EC, Skagius S (August 1989). "Long-term spontaneous changes following removal of all first premolars in Class I cases with crowding". European Journal of Orthodontics. 11 (3): 271–82. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejo.a035995. PMID 2792216.
  47. ^ von Cramon-Taubadel N (December 2011). "Global human mandibular variation reflects differences in agricultural and hunter-gatherer subsistence strategies". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 108 (49): 19546–51. Bibcode:2011PNAS..10819546V. doi:10.1073/pnas.1113050108. PMC 3241821. PMID 22106280.
  48. ^ Nayak KU, Goyal V, Malviya N (October 2011). "Two-phase treatment of class II malocclusion in young growing patient". Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 2 (4): 376–80. doi:10.4103/0976-237X.91808. PMC 3276872. PMID 22346172.
  49. ^ "Treatment of class ii malocclusions". 2013-11-14.
  50. ^ a b c Pinhasi R, Eshed V, von Cramon-Taubadel N (2015-02-04). "Incongruity between affinity patterns based on mandibular and lower dental dimensions following the transition to agriculture in the Near East, Anatolia and Europe". PLOS ONE. 10 (2): e0117301. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1017301P. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0117301. PMC 4317182. PMID 25651540.
  51. ^ a b c d Batista KB, Thiruvenkatachari B, Harrison JE, O'Brien KD (March 2018). "Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018 (3): CD003452. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003452.pub4. PMC 6494411. PMID 29534303.
  52. ^ CLASSIFICATION OF SKELETAL AND DENTAL MALOCCLUSION: REVISITED; Mageet, Adil Osman (2016). "Classification of Skeletal and Dental Malocclusion: Revisited". Stomatology Edu Journal. 3 (2): 205–211. doi:10.25241/2016.3(2).11.
  53. ^ Esthetics and biomechanics in orthodontics. Nanda, Ravindra,, Preceded by (work): Nanda, Ravindra. (Second ed.). St. Louis, Missouri. 2014-04-10. ISBN 978-0-323-22659-2. OCLC 880707123.cite book: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
  54. ^ Eslami S, Faber J, Fateh A, Sheikholaemmeh F, Grassia V, Jamilian A (August 2018). "Treatment decision in adult patients with class III malocclusion: surgery versus orthodontics". Progress in Orthodontics. 19 (1): 28. doi:10.1186/s40510-018-0218-0. PMC 6070451. PMID 30069814.
  55. ^ a b Uner O, Yüksel S, Uçüncü N (April 1995). "Long-term evaluation after chincap treatment". European Journal of Orthodontics. 17 (2): 135–41. doi:10.1093/ejo/17.2.135. PMID 7781722.
  56. ^ Ravi MS, Shetty NK, Prasad RB (January 2012). "Orthodontics-surgical combination therapy for Class III skeletal malocclusion". Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 3 (1): 78–82. doi:10.4103/0976-237X.94552. PMC 3341765. PMID 22557903.
  57. ^ Borzabadi Farahani A, Olkun HK, Eslamian L, Eslamipour F (2024). "A retrospective investigation of orthognathic patients and functional needs". Australasian Orthodontic Journal. 40: 111–120. doi:10.2478/aoj-2024-0013.
  58. ^ a b Atsawasuwan P, Hohlt W, Evans CA (April 2015). "Nonsurgical approach to Class I open-bite malocclusion with extrusion mechanics: a 3-year retention case report". American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 147 (4): 499–508. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.04.024. PMID 25836010.
  59. ^ a b Grauer D, Heymann GC, Swift EJ (June 2012). "Clinical management of tooth size discrepancies". Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 24 (3): 155–9. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8240.2012.00520.x. PMID 22691075. S2CID 11482185.
  60. ^ a b Cançado RH, Gonçalves Júnior W, Valarelli FP, Freitas KM, Crêspo JA (2015). "Association between Bolton discrepancy and Angle malocclusions". Brazilian Oral Research. 29: 1–6. doi:10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0116. PMID 26486769.
  61. ^ a b c Harrington C, Gallagher JR, Borzabadi-Farahani A (July 2015). "A retrospective analysis of dentofacial deformities and orthognathic surgeries using the index of orthognathic functional treatment need (IOFTN)". International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 79 (7): 1063–6. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2015.04.027. PMID 25957779.
  62. ^ a b c d Posnick JC (September 2013). "Definition and Prevalence of Dentofacial Deformities". Orthognatic Surgery: Principles and Practice. Amsterdam: Elsevier. pp. 61–68. doi:10.1016/B978-1-4557-2698-1.00003-4. ISBN 978-145572698-1.
  63. ^ a b c Borzabadi-Farahani A, Eslamipour F, Shahmoradi M (June 2016). "Functional needs of subjects with dentofacial deformities: A study using the index of orthognathic functional treatment need (IOFTN)". Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery. 69 (6): 796–801. doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2016.03.008. PMID 27068664.
  64. ^ Purkait, S (2011). Essentials of Oral Pathology 4th Edition.
  65. ^ Joshi N, Hamdan AM, Fakhouri WD (December 2014). "Skeletal malocclusion: a developmental disorder with a life-long morbidity". Journal of Clinical Medicine Research. 6 (6): 399–408. doi:10.14740/jocmr1905w. PMC 4169080. PMID 25247012.
  66. ^ Moreno Uribe LM, Miller SF (April 2015). "Genetics of the dentofacial variation in human malocclusion". Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research. 18 Suppl 1 (S1): 91–9. doi:10.1111/ocr.12083. PMC 4418210. PMID 25865537.

Further reading

[edit]
  • Peter S. Ungar, "The Trouble with Teeth: Our teeth are crowded, crooked and riddled with cavities. It hasn't always been this way", Scientific American, vol. 322, no. 4 (April 2020), pp. 44–49. "Our teeth [...] evolved over hundreds of millions of years to be incredibly strong and to align precisely for efficient chewing. [...] Our dental disorders largely stem from a shift in the oral environment caused by the introduction of softer, more sugary foods than the ones our ancestors typically ate."
[edit]