Premium
Decision‐Making Process for Treatment of Mandibular Fractures among Minority Groups
Author(s) -
DerMartirosian Claudia,
Gironda Melanie W.,
Black Edward,
Leathers Richard,
Atchison Kathryn A.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of public health dentistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.64
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1752-7325
pISSN - 0022-4006
DOI - 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2006.tb02549.x
Subject(s) - medicine , molar , internal fixation , dentistry , fixation (population genetics) , mandibular molar , orthodontics , surgery , population , environmental health
Objectives: While patients' preferences for medical care are widely studied, only a small number of studies have looked at the decision‐making process for dental treatment of mandibular fracture. This study examines the decision‐making process for treatment of mandibular fractures among minority groups. Study participants were asked to consider Maxillomandibular Fixation (MMF ‐ a non‐surgical approach of wiring the teeth for 4–8 weeks) or Rigid Internal Fixation (RIF ‐ surgical placement of bone plate). Methods: A qualitative study of patients receiving care at an inner‐city hospital for either 3 rd molar extraction under general anesthesia or a mandibular fracture were recruited to participate in an hour‐long focus group to discuss their preferences. The 3 rd molar group was selected as a comparison group exemplifying experience with oral surgery and recovery from general anesthesia. Results: Seven decision‐making factors affecting choice of treatment were discussed by both jaw fracture and 3 rd molar groups, including: side effects, effectiveness of each treatment, trusting doctor's recommendation, what to expect from each procedure, use of pictures from previous case studies, surgery location of scar/ incision, and size of scar. Rigid Internal Fixation (RIF) participants discussed a different set of concerns compared to Maxillomandibular Fixation (MMF) participants. Conclusions: Regardless of gender, the treatment of choice for both 3 rd molar and jaw fracture participants was the non‐surgical method of wiring of the teeth for 4–8 weeks. The Phase II part of this study will systematically examine patient preferences among a larger sample of 3 rd molar and jaw fracture patients by incorporating the patient‐reported concerns about treatment of jaw fracture found in this inductive, phenomenological study.