scholarly journals Knowledge and Attitude towards Orthodontic Treatment among Non-Orthodontic Specialists: An Online Survey in Croatia

2022 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
Sandra Brkanović ◽  
Marina Lapter Varga ◽  
Senka Meštrović
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Knowledge And Attitudes ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Knowledge And Attitude ◽  
Public Health Practitioners ◽  
The Ideal

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the knowledge and attitudes towards orthodontic treatment among non-orthodontic specialists. Methods: A web-based survey was formulated for non-orthodontic dental specialists to respond to statements regarding an orthodontic treatment. It contained 20 multiple-choice questions with three or more possible answers. Two hundred and fifty questionnaires were sent via email, with explanatory letters, to randomly selected non-orthodontic Croatian dental specialists. Data were assessed using IBAM SPSS 23.0. and p < 0.01 was considered significant. Results: The results indicate that the majority of respondents were well informed about principles and practices in orthodontics. All the respondents (100%) were aware that malocclusions can affect a patient’s facial aesthetic and masticatory function. The results also showed statistically significant differences in answers about contraindications for orthodontics therapy among different non-orthodontic specialists (p < 0.01). Private health practitioners were better informed about the ideal time for the first orthodontic appointment (74.2%) and that implants and periodontal problems are not contraindications for orthodontic treatment (over 70%), in comparison with public health practitioners. Conclusion: Non-orthodontic specialists in this sample exhibit encouraging awareness and knowledge of the principals and practices of orthodontic treatment. Additional improving of practitioners’ knowledge and awareness can help patients with malocclusion to decide upon orthodontic treatment at earlier stages and avoid later complications in the future.

scholarly journals What makes a ‘successful’ collaborative research project between public health practitioners and academics? A mixed-methods review of funding applications submitted to a local intervention evaluation scheme

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter van der Graaf ◽  
Lindsay Blank ◽  
Eleanor Holding ◽  
Elizabeth Goyder
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Evaluation Scheme ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Background The national Public Health Practice Evaluation Scheme (PHPES) is a response-mode funded evaluation programme operated by the National Institute for Health Research School for Public Health Research (NIHR SPHR). The scheme enables public health professionals to work in partnership with SPHR researchers to conduct rigorous evaluations of their interventions. Our evaluation reviewed the learning from the first five years of PHPES (2013–2017) and how this was used to implement a revised scheme within the School. Methods We conducted a rapid review of applications and reports from 81 PHPES projects and sampled eight projects (including unfunded) to interview one researcher and one practitioner involved in each sampled project (n = 16) in order to identify factors that influence success of applications and effective delivery and dissemination of evaluations. Findings from the review and interviews were tested in an online survey with practitioners (applicants), researchers (principal investigators [PIs]) and PHPES panel members (n = 19) to explore the relative importance of these factors. Findings from the survey were synthesised and discussed for implications at a national workshop with wider stakeholders, including public members (n = 20). Results Strengths: PHPES provides much needed resources for evaluation which often are not available locally, and produces useful evidence to understand where a programme is not delivering, which can be used to formatively develop interventions. Weaknesses: Objectives of PHPES were too narrowly focused on (cost-)effectiveness of interventions, while practitioners also valued implementation studies and process evaluations. Opportunities: PHPES provided opportunities for novel/promising but less developed ideas. More funded time to develop a protocol and ensure feasibility of the intervention prior to application could increase intervention delivery success rates. Threats: There can be tensions between researchers and practitioners, for example, on the need to show the 'success’ of the intervention, on the use of existing research evidence, and the importance of generalisability of findings and of generating peer-reviewed publications. Conclusions The success of collaborative research projects between public health practitioners (PHP) and researchers can be improved by funders being mindful of tensions related to (1) the scope of collaborations, (2) local versus national impact, and (3) increasing inequalities in access to funding. Our study and comparisons with related funding schemes demonstrate how these tensions can be successfully resolved.

Aligning Public Health Training and Practice in Evaluation: Implications and Recommendations for Educators

2021 ◽  
pp. 237337992110336
Author(s):  
Bree L. Hemingway ◽  
Sarah Douville ◽  
Leslie A. Fierro
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
The United States ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
Community Practice ◽  
Public Health Training ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Centers For Disease Control ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Objective. This study aimed to understand the extent to which master of public health (MPH) graduates engage in evaluation on the job, to learn how MPH graduates implement evaluation, and to hear from MPH graduates about how their academic training prepared them for the evaluation work they perform. Methods. Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Evaluation Framework, this convergent mixed-methods study included an online survey with 89 public health practitioners and follow-up interviews with 17 survey respondents. The study was performed in the United States during summer 2020. Results. In addition to participating in evaluation activities related to all six Centers for Disease Control and Prevention framework steps, MPH graduates engage in evaluation capacity building, evaluating for health equity and social justice, and funding activities. Participants noted a disconnect between academic preparation and community practice, were least confident in focusing the evaluation design, and most often used surveys to collect data. Conclusions. Public health practitioners commonly engage in evaluation activities but do not feel fully prepared to do so given their MPH training. Many opportunities exist to enhance graduate/postgraduate training through connecting public health with the broader professional practice of evaluation.

Understanding public health informatics competencies for mid-tier public health practitioners—a Web-based survey

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiehwen Ed Hsu ◽  
Kim Dunn ◽  
Hsin-Hsuan Juo ◽  
Rick Danko ◽  
Drew Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Informatics ◽  
Public Health Informatics ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

scholarly journals Developing web-based training for public health practitioners: what can we learn from a review of five disciplines?

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 276-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Ballew ◽  
S. Castro ◽  
J. Claus ◽  
N. Kittur ◽  
L. Brennan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Five Disciplines ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

scholarly journals After Action Review of the 2019 measles outbreak in Clark County, Washington, U.S.A

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Stoto ◽  
R Piltch-Loeb ◽  
R Wolfe ◽  
R Albrandt ◽  
A Melnick
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Religious Community ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Clark County ◽  
After Action Review ◽  
Measles Outbreak ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Issue Clark County experienced a measles outbreak that challenged public health authorities. Description of the practice: We conducted a formal After Action Review with state and local health officials, school officials, and others to identify lessons for public health practitioners facing future outbreaks. Results Following the early identification of measles in a child who had recently arrived from Ukraine, active surveillance identified 71 confirmed cases, most in unvaccinated persons under 18 years of age. 4,138 contacts were traced and public health personnel made daily monitoring calls to 816. 53 potential exposure sites in healthcare facilities, schools and other public places were identified and communicated to the public. As a social distancing measure, unvaccinated students, teachers, and staff were excluded from schools in which exposure had occurred. Ascertaining susceptibility status was challenging. The national anti-vaccination sentiment and a parallel outbreak in a New York religious community created challenges in representing community risk while avoiding stigmatization of a community in which the first reported case was identified. Rather than respond to every false claim on social media, the health department developed talking points about emerging issues and engaged the community in dialogue. Lessons Responding to the measles outbreak required innovative approaches to surveillance and contact tracing, social distancing (school exclusions), and emergency risk communication. The response required extensive coordinated efforts of the county and state health departments, school systems, and many other organizations. Mutual aid enabled an influx of resources but managing the surge of responders proved challenging. Key messages Public health emergencies require effective emergency management practices. Carefully conducted After Action Reviews of health emergencies can help public health practitioners identify challenges and innovative practices.

Characterizing the acceptability of a vaccine for West Nile virus by public health practitioners

Vaccine ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (19) ◽  
pp. 3423-3427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tasha Epp ◽  
Shannon Waldner ◽  
Judith Wright ◽  
Phil Curry ◽  
Hugh G. Townsend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
West Nile Virus ◽  
West Nile ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document