Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The authors' objectives were to determine the size and characteristics of the dentally underserved U.S. population, describe the capacity of the safety net system to treat the underserved, explore policy options for expanding the system and discuss the policy implications of these findings. METHODS:The data came from published reports from health care organizations and researchers, as well as from public officials, dental educators and clinic directors. The values presented are estimates from available data. RESULTS:The underserved population consists of 82 million people from low-income families. Only 27.8 percent of this population visits a dentist each year. The primary components of the safety net are dental clinics in community health centers, hospitals, public schools and dental schools. This system has the capacity to care for about 7 to 8 million people annually. The politically feasible options for expanding the system include increasing the number of community clinics and their efficiency, requiring dental school graduates to receive one year of residency training, and requiring senior dental students and residents to work 60 days in community clinics and practices. This could increase the capacity of the system to treat about 10 million people annually. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:The safety net system has limited capacity but could be improved to care for another 2.5 million people. Even if it is expanded, however, the majority of low-income patients would need to obtain care in private practices to reduce access disparities. The biggest challenge is convincing the American people to provide the funds needed to care for the poor in safety net clinics and private practices.

The U.S. health care system, best suited to acute care for adults, struggles to accommodate vulnerable populations (such as the elderly, disabled, and mentally ill), and struggles even more to find or put in place a system to care for special needs populations. Special needs populations require a protective and preventive system--one that helps families anticipate upcoming needs as patients transition through life cycles, and monitors problems as they arise while coordinating services. Developing such a system, using a life cycle methodology, is a critical health policy frontier.

In November 2004, the Pacific Center for Special Care at the University of the Pacific Arthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, with support from the California Dental Association Foundation, hosted a conference to explore the issue of oral health for people with special needs. This conference was held in conjunction with the joint meetings of Pacific's Statewide Task Force on Oral Health for People With Special Needs and Pacific's Statewide Task Force on Oral Health and Aging. These groups of interested stakeholders meet several times a year to discuss the increasing problems faced by people with disabilities, elderly individuals, and other special populations in obtaining access to oral health services and maintaining good oral health. The purpose of this conference was to explore the changing population of people with special needs, analyze the implications for the dental profession and society, and describe systems and strategies that might lead to improved oral health for these populations. This conference also served as a forum for developing oral health recommendations as a part of the California Commission on Aging's Strategic Plan for an Aging Population. Seven nationally recognized speakers presented draft papers on various aspects of this topic. These presentations are published as the additional papers in this and the next issue of the Journal. There was time for audience reaction and discussion with the speakers. The speakers and a designated group of reactors then developed this consensus statement and recommendations for addressing these issues.

BACKGROUND: Achieving cancer early-detection goals remains a challenge, especially among low-income and minority populations. DESIGN/SETTING: A randomized trial based in 62 community health centers for the underserved in New York, New Jersey, and western Connecticut. Family physicians were on staff at most of the centers. INTERVENTION: Workshops, materials, and ongoing advice for center leaders promoted implementation of a preventive services office system to identify patients in need of services at each visit through use of medical record flow sheets, other tools, and staff involvement. EVALUATION END POINTS: The proportion of randomly selected patients by center who were up to date for indicated services at baseline (n = 2645) and follow-up (n = 2864) record review. RESULTS: Only 1 service (breast self-examination advice) increased more in intervention centers. Seven of 8 target services increased significantly for the 62 centers overall. During the study, the medical director changed in 26 centers (42%). Keeping the same medical director at intervention centers was associated with improvements in services. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer early-detection services are improving in community health centers, but the intervention had only a small impact, as determined by record review. To have an impact, the intervention required that there be no change in medical director. The relationship of changes in the practice environment to services delivered is complex and deserves more study.

This article presents the results of a small workgroup convened by the American Association of Dental Schools to examine experiences related to establishing and conducting dental education programs that have significant affiliations with community-based clinical care settings. The workgroup meeting is a component of the association's effort to identify and promote innovative and non-traditional methods by which the number of postdoctoral general dentistry (PGD) positions can be increased to meet current demand for PGD education. The participants identified factors and conditions believed to be critical to successful program linkages. The information should be helpful to others as they consider opportunities to establish PGD programs or increase their number of PGD training positions.