A qualitative look at parents' experience of their child's dental general anaesthesia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Caries relapse after treatment of early childhood caries (ECC) under general anaesthesia (GA) has been frequently reported. This research used a qualitative method of inquiry to explore parents' experience of their child's treatment under GA, and their perception of the impact of this treatment on their child. METHODS: The participants were parents whose children had recently undergone dental rehabilitation under GA. Data was collected by semistructured, open-ended interviews scheduled at the postoperative appointment. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed, checked and coded into a qualitative computer software program for analysis. Data collection and analysis were done simultaneously, and the interview guide was modified based on responses. RESULTS: Parents were troubled that their child needed a GA and appeared aware of the complications. While some parents felt 'guilty' and struggled to accept this mode of treatment for their child, others felt 'blameless', and were convinced that the GA was 'preferable' for their child and superior to conventional treatment. Nonetheless, all parents reported some levels of anxiety during the GA; they expressed their emotions with 'fear', 'worry' and 'concern'. After the GA, improvement was reported by most parents in their child's amount of dental pain, sleeping pattern, eating habits and acceptance of parental toothbrushing. The most common changes in their child's behaviour mentioned by parents were increased toothbrushing and decreased consumption of sugary foods. Several children who had had primary teeth extracted were distressed as a result of this 'loss'. CONCLUSION: The general anaesthetic experience was troubling in a variety of ways for both parents and children. However, an 'early' and positive outcome of the GA was a reported improvement in dental health practices. Parents were more positive about maintaining the health of primary teeth and now knew how to take care of their child's teeth. Future exploration is required to reveal if and how the GA experience will affect long-term preventive behaviours.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».