Scholarlink

Background <p>Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA), one of the most common sleep disorders, is associated with a large amount of morbidity to both the heart and metabolic function. Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) remains the gold standard treatment for patients with OSA. In contrast, Dental treatments such as Mandibular Advancement Devices (MADs) are considered well-established alternatives for certain patients. Since General Practitioners (GPs) often initiate the diagnostic and therapeutic management of these patients, the extent of their understanding of dental and craniofacial management options remains unclear.</p> Materials and methods <p>An electronic cross-sectional survey was conducted among licensed Medical Practitioners from both the Allopathic and AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga &amp; Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa, and Homeopathy) streams. A 15-question questionnaire was used to assess four domains: (1) Aetiology, (2) Diagnosis, (3) Treatment, and (4) Referral Practices. Responses (“Agree,” “Disagree,” “Not aware”) were recorded and converted to a binary system for analysis, where Agree equals 1 and Disagree/Not aware equals 0. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests will help analyse the variation between domains at a statistically significant level (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p> Results <p>Diagnostic awareness was moderate, with 57.6% identifying polysomnography (PSG) as the gold standard test. There was a deficiency in knowledge on the available treatment options: only half of them recognized MADs as efficient. The composite scoring provided a moderate knowledge score (6.72 ± 3.08) and significantly lower mean awareness score (1.79 ± 0.73). There was great heterogeneity between domains (χ2 = 127.31, df = 36, <i>p</i> = 0.0001) as familiarity with dental and craniofacial and referral-related aspects of OSA care was inconsistent.</p> Conclusion <p>GPs showed a greater level of awareness of general diagnostic concepts compared to craniofacial risk factors, oral appliance therapy, or interdisciplinary referral pathways. Specific educational programs and organized medical-dental partnership models should be established in order to enhance integrated management of OSA.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Assessment of the knowledge and awareness among general medical practitioners toward dental intervention in diagnosing and treating obstructive sleep apnea: a cross-sectional study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月24日

查看全文
  • Arti Agrawal,
  • Sharayu Nimonkar,
  • Vikram Belkhode,
  • Surekha Godbole,
  • Namita Zilpilwar,
  • Raghav Munje,
  • Pranali Nimonkar

摘要

Background

Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA), one of the most common sleep disorders, is associated with a large amount of morbidity to both the heart and metabolic function. Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) remains the gold standard treatment for patients with OSA. In contrast, Dental treatments such as Mandibular Advancement Devices (MADs) are considered well-established alternatives for certain patients. Since General Practitioners (GPs) often initiate the diagnostic and therapeutic management of these patients, the extent of their understanding of dental and craniofacial management options remains unclear.

Materials and methods

An electronic cross-sectional survey was conducted among licensed Medical Practitioners from both the Allopathic and AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa, and Homeopathy) streams. A 15-question questionnaire was used to assess four domains: (1) Aetiology, (2) Diagnosis, (3) Treatment, and (4) Referral Practices. Responses (“Agree,” “Disagree,” “Not aware”) were recorded and converted to a binary system for analysis, where Agree equals 1 and Disagree/Not aware equals 0. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests will help analyse the variation between domains at a statistically significant level (p < 0.05).

Results

Diagnostic awareness was moderate, with 57.6% identifying polysomnography (PSG) as the gold standard test. There was a deficiency in knowledge on the available treatment options: only half of them recognized MADs as efficient. The composite scoring provided a moderate knowledge score (6.72 ± 3.08) and significantly lower mean awareness score (1.79 ± 0.73). There was great heterogeneity between domains (χ2 = 127.31, df = 36, p = 0.0001) as familiarity with dental and craniofacial and referral-related aspects of OSA care was inconsistent.

Conclusion

GPs showed a greater level of awareness of general diagnostic concepts compared to craniofacial risk factors, oral appliance therapy, or interdisciplinary referral pathways. Specific educational programs and organized medical-dental partnership models should be established in order to enhance integrated management of OSA.