scholarly journals 1013. Enhanced Oral Health Care Services for PLWHA - Midlands Region, South Carolina

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S535-S536
Author(s):  
Christina M Baello ◽  
Divya Ahuja ◽  
Norlica Finkley ◽  
Rajee Rao

Abstract Background An estimated 58- 64 % of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) do not receive regular dental care and this gap may be attributed to barriers related to cost, access to dental care, logistical issues, indifference to or fear of dental care.1,2 The Immunology Center at Prisma- University of South Carolina, School of Medicine is a Ryan White funded Part B Program that provides care to > 2400 PLWHA. Based on the perceived barriers, an enhanced oral health care program was implemented in 2018, wherein patients in need of dental care and meeting inclusion criteria are referred to contracted local general dentistry and specialty practices. Enhancements Dedicated Dental Services Coordinator (DSC) Facilitated transport to and from the dental clinic Annual budget of $2700 per patient Access to dental specialties (oral and maxillofacial surgery) Restorative services (crowns, dentures and root canals) Program Goals The ultimate goal of the oral health care program is to provide biannual dental prophylaxis and expanded restorative services to PLWHA. Inclusion criteria for referrals 1 Virological suppression over 6 months. (HIV Viral Load < 200 c/mL) 2 Adherence with HIV clinic appointments. Midlands Region, South Carolina Methods The DSC completes the following: monitoring of referrals, patient compliance to program inclusion criteria, linkage to dental care, payments for dental services, and coordination with case management. Results Between 2018 and 2019, 535 patients were referred to the oral health care program. Almost 75% 399 completed at least one dental clinic visit. The average number of visits for patients from their enrollment date (2018-2019 to December 2019 was 1.56, with an average of 8.08 services, and 1.13 prophylaxis visits with their oral health care provider. Patients were predominantly African American and male but were spread across a wide age spectrum and 8 counties. Nearly 94% of patients remained virologically suppressed during their oral health care treatment. Table 1: 2018-2019 Program Summary of Oral Health Care Table 2 & Figure 1: Oral Health Care Patients by Age Group, Figure 2: Oral Health Care Patient by Gender Table 3 & Figure 3: Oral Health Care Patients by Race and Ethnicity, Table 4 & Figure 4: Oral Health Care Patient by County Conclusion PLWHA have high rates of unmet oral health care needs and low utilization of oral health services. Adequate resources and coordination of care with local dentists can overcome traditional barriers and improve access to dental care. Abstract References Disclosures: All Authors: No reported disclosures

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 863-872 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Meyer ◽  
Mansoureh Khorshidi-Böhm ◽  
Werner Geurtsen ◽  
Hüsamettin Günay

2003 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 240-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Diamond ◽  
Eugene Litwak ◽  
Stephen Marshall ◽  
Alexis Diamond

Author(s):  
Blánaid Daly ◽  
Paul Batchelor ◽  
Elizabeth Treasure ◽  
Richard Watt

This chapter will briefly describe how oral health care may be managed and organized and how health workers may be remunerated. This will be followed by a short outline of the ways in which oral health care is provided in the UK. A separate overview of dental care professionals (DCPs) is presented in this chapter. The reform of the NHS is ongoing, so this chapter discusses principles rather than detail. Since the devolution of health care to governments in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, variations in provision are occurring across the UK and some of these differences are highlighted. If oral health care is to be provided it has to be funded. The money has to be derived from the public and this can be either from individuals or from taxation. Within the UK there are a variety of ways in which oral health care is funded. Figure 19.1 shows the possible flows of money. The model that exists in the UK is in the main centred on routes 1 and 3, based on taxation, either direct or through national insurance contributions, and its subsequent allocation to various public-funded services, including dentistry. In Germany, the arrangement is slightly different in that third-party insurance groups are involved and a proportion of an individual’s annual salary is allocated to health care. A third model operates in the USA under the guise of managed care. Individuals buy into a care plan that is organized by a health care company, which subsequently contracts with dentists to provide a level of care. In route 2, the public pays the dentist directly for his or her services; this is a private arrangement. A third party may intervene to control pricing. For example, Dutch and Swedish adult dental care is now mostly in the private sector, but each year the profession negotiates the scale of fees with their government. The subsequent distribution process for paying oral care workers is illustrated in Figure 19.2. There are again three mechanisms: . . . 1 A purely private arrangement. . . . . . . 2 The state pays the total cost. . . .


2006 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 411-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haruhisa IBAYASHI ◽  
Junko YANO ◽  
Pham TRUONG MINH ◽  
Masayuki TANAKA ◽  
Tomohiro NISHIYAMA ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document