Methods: 146 dentists in 9 countries were recruited, by local coordinators, to pilot a system for the uniform, Europe-wide collection of dental surveillance data. Generally, two half days of training were used to introduce the volunteers to the “Oral Health Clinical Indicators Survey Form“, before returning to their practices with a target of examining 20 patients each. The survey form included eight clinical sections though completion of some was patient's-age-dependent. In two countries half of the dentists examined soft-tissue only and the remainder examined hard-tissues [fluorosis and International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) caries score]. Dentists also completed questionnaires following each patient's assessment (green) indicating their personal level of difficulty in completing each clinical section, and another (mauve) indicating, after all patients, the acceptability to them of the examination in general.
Results: 2,016 green post-patient questionnaires and 102 mauve overall questionnaires were returned (69.1% of target). The percentage of dentists claiming little/no difficulty ranged from 72.1% - 99.5% across the eight clinical sections. Mean examination time (minutes) varied by section, e.g. 1.25 (orthodontic treatment), 10.67 (ICDAS), and 12.47 (Loss of Attachment + Community Periodontal Index). In the free comments section of the mauve questionnaires, 54% indicated worries about time taken away from treatment time. Recording loss of attachment was noted as a particular concern, due to the time taken and unfamiliarity with the measure.
Conclusions: European GDPs reported little difficulty in conducting the oral health surveys but many felt the time taken was burdensome. It is concluded that GDPs can be used to carry out survey work in addition to their routine practice provided that the time taken is considered appropriately.