{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.046488125315816066, 'fraction_numerical': 0.048004042445679636, 'mean_word_length': 5.206896551724138, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A questionnaire study to derive information on the working environment, clinical training, use of ancillary staff and optimization of patient radiation dose within UK dental practice.

AIM
To evaluate the working environment of GDPs and Endodontists and the methods used to optimize patient radiation dose.


METHODOLOGY
A total of 857 GDPs and 170 specialist Endodontists were contacted. The responders, 603 of the former and 132 of the latter, completed a questionnaire covering practitioner demographics, pattern of practice, the use of radiographic techniques and the optimization of dose. Chi-squared tests were used to compare groups at the P=0.05 level of significance. For nonparametric data, the Mann-Whitney U-test was employed.


RESULTS
A response rate of 73% was achieved. Overall, 79.5% of endodontic specialists used film holders compared with 65.9% of GDPs (P=0.001). One hundred and thirty (98.5%) endodontists and 581 (96.3%) GDPs reported that they were well prepared or adequately prepared in radiographically assessing the presence of apical pathosis. The study found significant differences (P<0.001) between the use of digital radiography by specialist endodontists 93 (70.5%) compared with general dental practitioners 167 (27.7%). Significant differences (P=0.004) were also observed in the use of rectangular collimation between endodontic specialists 55 (42%) and GDPs 223 (37%). With regard to the use of film holders in diagnostic radiography, 105 (79.5%) of endodontic specialists employed these devices compared with 396 (65.7%) GDPs; this finding was significant (P=0.005). For working length estimation, significant differences (P=0.001) were noted in the use of a film holder between endodontic specialists 105 (79.5%) and GDPs 386 (64%).


CONCLUSIONS
Both Endodontists and GDPs demonstrated compliance with guidelines relating to radiation protection being more significant amongst those clinicians working within specialist clinical practice.