Consumer and provider attitudes toward dentist and expanded auxiliary functions

Consumers, dentists, dental students, dental assistants, dental hygienists, dental assistant trainees, and dental hygiene students in Massachusetts were surveyed for their attitudes toward the concept of expanded-duties auxiliaries. The Osgood sematic differential technique was used, in which study participants were asked to respond to line drawings of a dentist or an auxiliary performing each of three different procedures: cutting tooth structure, placing a restoration, and taking radiographs. The results indicate that most of the groups perceived significant differences between cavity preparation by the dentist and by the auxiliary: they were modierately positive toward the former, near neutral toward the latter. Groups were more positive toward cavity restoration, generally perceiving fewer, but still significant, differences between the dentist and auxiliary as operatiors. All groups were most positive toward taking radiographs and perceived no difference between the two operators. Of all groups, the dentists perceived the greatest difference between operators; dental hygienists and dental hygiene students were the most positive and saw the least differences between operators. Consumers were the least positive to all procedures and perveived only modirate differences between the two operators. In other words, the consumers did not seem overly concerned with who provided the dental care; they just did not like the services themselves. In the study, the consumer was more concerned with the procedure than with the different operators, whereas the dentist was more concerned about the operator.