FACULTY ATTENDS QUALITY AND PATIENT SAFETY CONFERENCE AMRITA NARAIN FGDP(UK) RESEARCH OFFICER
T
he FGDP(UK) attended the Quality and Patient Safety Conference held at MANDEC (Manchester Dental Education Centre) on 20 October at the invitation of Professor Martin Tickle, a dentist by background who currently holds the post of Director of the Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester.
The speaker, Stephen Campbell, Professor of Primary Care Research at University of Manchester, concluded there really wasn’t a definition, thereby justifying the basis for the proposed work. This formed the second presentation, an overview of the project that was given by Professor Martin Tickle.
The team at University of Manchester have received a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Development Grant (Reference Number RP-DG-1211-10007) of £100k and the main focus of the day was to report their findings to date. There were a number of themes to this initial work including the undertaking of reviews of measures and indicators of quality and patient safety; a national survey of members of the public to obtain their views on what they understood by quality in dentistry; work surrounding patient and public involvement and engagement to help develop the research team’s thinking, and their work on building a multidisciplinary team to submit a bid for additional funding from NIHR.
This was followed by two further presentations on what were listed as systematic reviews, the first on quality, the second on patient safety; both of which were acknowledged by the presenters as being more of scoping reviews identifying the breadth and depth of the literature on each topic. The main conclusion from each review was that there has been very little research undertaken on quality and patient safety.
Present at the meeting were approximately 45 attendees, 17 of whom were linked directly to the University of Manchester; six consultants from Dental Public Health, the chief dental officer (CDO) of Wales and both deputy CDOs of England, and five dental commissioners. Other attendees included two dental care professionals (DCPs), individuals representing groups that were working with the University of Manchester team, the GDC, and Denplan. Three general dental practitioners (GDPs) also attended and presented aspects of the work to date. The day was divided into four parts. Following an introduction by the Director of Commissioning Development NHS England North, there were two presentations setting the scene on quality and patient safety definition.
14
These were followed by the results of a national survey commissioned by a team from Ipsos MORI on around 500 members of the public. Their main conclusions were that access, value for money and trust were important elements of quality. The data were presented broken down into various subcategories to suggest socio-economic and regional differences but with the small sample size, meaningful variation was difficult to ascertain. Interestingly when questioned, the presenter had paid little heed to the national Adult Dental Health Surveys that contain some limited questions on ‘quality’. The next presentation reported on two smaller projects that had been undertaken with dental therapists/hygienists. The first examined the ability of dentists and the DCP group to distinguish between benign and malignant oral lesions and concluded that there were no real differences; the second on the two groups to diagnose caries and periodontal disease. The possible implications for workforce
planning were highlighted although this in itself was not part of the conference agenda. After lunch the presentations centred on public and patient involvement. There was an overview of patient and public involvement (PPI) by the director of a PPI liaison group, a set of video interviews by the director of People’s Voice Media and the only presentation by a GDP during the day, on the use of SMS text messaging to collect feedback from patients on the quality of the care they received. The video interviews can be accessed at www.dentalqualityresearch.org. The final session dealt with a project covering minor oral surgery and the quality and patient safety of referrals that assumed that the three levels of care outlined in the care pathway work within the Department of Health in England would exist, and a talk on patient safety in dental hospitals. Finally, there was a discussion on the way forward for the work with the majority of the audience agreeing that the area was important but that there was no clear steer on the outcome because of the paucity of information in the literature. As a consequence, a significant body of research is required to further our understanding. The initial work suggested that certain elements such as access, health needs, technical aspects of care, patient safety, patient centred care, and trust could make up identified domains of quality at three levels – population, practice and patient.
Summary The main message that came across from the day is that the Manchester team are looking to submit a bid in March for funding an NIHR project into quality and
P R I M A R Y D E N TA L J O U R N A L
Faculty hosts successful course on research methodology The Faculty ran a two-day course on the Essentials of Research Methodology on 5 and 6 December.
The project will be jointly led by professors Martin Tickle and Stephen Campbell, and the team will include working GDPs, service commissioners and dental public health specialists, biostatisticians, health economists, systematic reviewers, behavioural scientists, informaticians, qualitative researchers, experts in patient experience and international collaborators. The role of the Faculty in furthering our understanding of quality is likely to be two-fold: advisory – to review output of the research programme and provide advice to the team on future direction, and participatory – to provide representatives of the Faculty to participate in specific projects, particularly those requiring professional consensus and to help disseminate the outcomes of the research to GDPs and the wider dental team.
The feedback from the day was ‘excellent’ in the main and judging from comments, ‘was a much needed course with an exceptional series of lectures by speakers who were engaging, informative and extremely helpful.’ One delegate said: ‘This is a topic which is seldom taught in dental schools and the knowledge gained in the two days will help pave the pathway to a future in supporting and contributing to medical and dental research.’ The Faculty thanks Dr Trevor Johnson, Dr Nicola Innes, Dr Thomas Lewis, Professor Nairn Wilson, Professor Ario Santini and Dr Steve Lucarotti who helped deliver an informative introduction to research methodology. Most participants have expressed an interest in a more comprehensive programme that would address gaps in knowledge faced by general dental practitioners starting out in research.
Photo: Owen Morgan
patient safety. The overarching purpose of the work is to produce a Quality Improvement Toolkit for Primary Dental Care. A supplementary aim would be to hone the conceptual understanding of quality and assess how big a problem patient safety is in dentistry.
The course was designed to equip candidates with the necessary skills to carry out research successfully; from reviewing literature and formulating a research question, drafting a research protocol, understanding the process of applying for ethical approval, learning the research methods applicable to clinical studies, learning how to formulate a questionnaire, how to prepare papers for publication and learning the basics of statistical analysis of data.
This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Development Grant Programme (Reference Number RP-DG-1211-10007). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.
VOL. 4 NO. 1 FEBRUARY 2015
15
T
he FGDP(UK) attended the Quality and Patient Safety Conference held at MANDEC (Manchester Dental Education Centre) on 20 October at the invitation of Professor Martin Tickle, a dentist by background who currently holds the post of Director of the Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester.
The speaker, Stephen Campbell, Professor of Primary Care Research at University of Manchester, concluded there really wasn’t a definition, thereby justifying the basis for the proposed work. This formed the second presentation, an overview of the project that was given by Professor Martin Tickle.
The team at University of Manchester have received a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Development Grant (Reference Number RP-DG-1211-10007) of £100k and the main focus of the day was to report their findings to date. There were a number of themes to this initial work including the undertaking of reviews of measures and indicators of quality and patient safety; a national survey of members of the public to obtain their views on what they understood by quality in dentistry; work surrounding patient and public involvement and engagement to help develop the research team’s thinking, and their work on building a multidisciplinary team to submit a bid for additional funding from NIHR.
This was followed by two further presentations on what were listed as systematic reviews, the first on quality, the second on patient safety; both of which were acknowledged by the presenters as being more of scoping reviews identifying the breadth and depth of the literature on each topic. The main conclusion from each review was that there has been very little research undertaken on quality and patient safety.
Present at the meeting were approximately 45 attendees, 17 of whom were linked directly to the University of Manchester; six consultants from Dental Public Health, the chief dental officer (CDO) of Wales and both deputy CDOs of England, and five dental commissioners. Other attendees included two dental care professionals (DCPs), individuals representing groups that were working with the University of Manchester team, the GDC, and Denplan. Three general dental practitioners (GDPs) also attended and presented aspects of the work to date. The day was divided into four parts. Following an introduction by the Director of Commissioning Development NHS England North, there were two presentations setting the scene on quality and patient safety definition.
14
These were followed by the results of a national survey commissioned by a team from Ipsos MORI on around 500 members of the public. Their main conclusions were that access, value for money and trust were important elements of quality. The data were presented broken down into various subcategories to suggest socio-economic and regional differences but with the small sample size, meaningful variation was difficult to ascertain. Interestingly when questioned, the presenter had paid little heed to the national Adult Dental Health Surveys that contain some limited questions on ‘quality’. The next presentation reported on two smaller projects that had been undertaken with dental therapists/hygienists. The first examined the ability of dentists and the DCP group to distinguish between benign and malignant oral lesions and concluded that there were no real differences; the second on the two groups to diagnose caries and periodontal disease. The possible implications for workforce
planning were highlighted although this in itself was not part of the conference agenda. After lunch the presentations centred on public and patient involvement. There was an overview of patient and public involvement (PPI) by the director of a PPI liaison group, a set of video interviews by the director of People’s Voice Media and the only presentation by a GDP during the day, on the use of SMS text messaging to collect feedback from patients on the quality of the care they received. The video interviews can be accessed at www.dentalqualityresearch.org. The final session dealt with a project covering minor oral surgery and the quality and patient safety of referrals that assumed that the three levels of care outlined in the care pathway work within the Department of Health in England would exist, and a talk on patient safety in dental hospitals. Finally, there was a discussion on the way forward for the work with the majority of the audience agreeing that the area was important but that there was no clear steer on the outcome because of the paucity of information in the literature. As a consequence, a significant body of research is required to further our understanding. The initial work suggested that certain elements such as access, health needs, technical aspects of care, patient safety, patient centred care, and trust could make up identified domains of quality at three levels – population, practice and patient.
Summary The main message that came across from the day is that the Manchester team are looking to submit a bid in March for funding an NIHR project into quality and
P R I M A R Y D E N TA L J O U R N A L
Faculty hosts successful course on research methodology The Faculty ran a two-day course on the Essentials of Research Methodology on 5 and 6 December.
The project will be jointly led by professors Martin Tickle and Stephen Campbell, and the team will include working GDPs, service commissioners and dental public health specialists, biostatisticians, health economists, systematic reviewers, behavioural scientists, informaticians, qualitative researchers, experts in patient experience and international collaborators. The role of the Faculty in furthering our understanding of quality is likely to be two-fold: advisory – to review output of the research programme and provide advice to the team on future direction, and participatory – to provide representatives of the Faculty to participate in specific projects, particularly those requiring professional consensus and to help disseminate the outcomes of the research to GDPs and the wider dental team.
The feedback from the day was ‘excellent’ in the main and judging from comments, ‘was a much needed course with an exceptional series of lectures by speakers who were engaging, informative and extremely helpful.’ One delegate said: ‘This is a topic which is seldom taught in dental schools and the knowledge gained in the two days will help pave the pathway to a future in supporting and contributing to medical and dental research.’ The Faculty thanks Dr Trevor Johnson, Dr Nicola Innes, Dr Thomas Lewis, Professor Nairn Wilson, Professor Ario Santini and Dr Steve Lucarotti who helped deliver an informative introduction to research methodology. Most participants have expressed an interest in a more comprehensive programme that would address gaps in knowledge faced by general dental practitioners starting out in research.
Photo: Owen Morgan
patient safety. The overarching purpose of the work is to produce a Quality Improvement Toolkit for Primary Dental Care. A supplementary aim would be to hone the conceptual understanding of quality and assess how big a problem patient safety is in dentistry.
The course was designed to equip candidates with the necessary skills to carry out research successfully; from reviewing literature and formulating a research question, drafting a research protocol, understanding the process of applying for ethical approval, learning the research methods applicable to clinical studies, learning how to formulate a questionnaire, how to prepare papers for publication and learning the basics of statistical analysis of data.
This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Development Grant Programme (Reference Number RP-DG-1211-10007). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.
VOL. 4 NO. 1 FEBRUARY 2015
15
