English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Aims: This article describes the results of a survey among dentists and dental technician regarding interdisciplinary teamwork. Interdisciplinary dental collaborations seem to be based on different conceptions with the consequence of various strengths but also weaknesses within teams. Study Design: International questionnaire (Germane, English, Russian). Place and Duration of Study: 250 questionnaires were handed out in paper form and 100 access codes for the Web-based version were sent. The survey was conducted between February and May 2011. Methodology: Dentists as well as dental technicians were permitted to participate in the survey. Candidates were recruited at postgraduate educational events. Previous participants of similar educational events were sent an access code via e-mail. Results: 132 questionnaires were evaluated (response rate of 37.7%). Of the surveyed persons, 60 were women (47%) and 72 were men (53%). The mean age of the respondents was 40.3 years +/-11.51 years. Associations with other specialties (n=84, 63.6%), solutions for unresolved problems (n=83, 62.9%), and expansion of one's own specialty (n=65, 49.2%) were the most frequently cited reasons to favor the use of interdisciplinary task groups. Difficult or ambiguous communication (n=73, 55.3%), conflicts within the team (n=70, 53.0%), and scheduling difficulties (n=63, 47.7%) were the most frequently cited reasons for not pursuing interdisciplinary cooperation, followed by rising costs and the expense of resources (n=62, 47.0%), the need to modify one's own concept (n=58, 43.2%), and the absence of a balance between workload and financial remuneration (n=52, 38.6%). Conclusion: Interdisciplinarity should not be regarded as the opposite of technological specialization. On the contrary, advancing technological developments in IDD will probably enforce a certain degree of specialization. Therefore, in the future it will become necessary not to lose contact with other specialties, keep open communication lines by means of a common language and common concepts, and also maintain communication with other medical specialties

Concepts, Aims and Drawbacks in Interdisciplinary Dentistry: Results of an International Questionnaire