London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Greenwich 1969

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Greenwich Borough]

This page requires JavaScript

293
In this we have succeeded by such steps as redecoration, replacement
of wooden benches and chairs in waiting rooms by modern
furniture and by provision of wall boards displaying dental health
education material arranged for the various age groups. Equipment
is now felt to be up to the standard found in a modern dental
practice and includes in all surgeries such aids as X-ray machines,
high speed drills, electric aspirators, operating lights, amalgamators,
thermostatic control for sterilizers and glass bead sterilizers for
root treatment. Improvement costs were kept to a minimum by
adding to existing equipment rather than by wasteful replacement.
In short, our dental clinics are now pleasant for the patient to come
to and for the staff to work in.
As mentioned in previous reports, with a school roll of approximately
39,000 the potential of the service is inadequate. Although
treatment covers patients of all age groups, excess demand over
treatment availability dictates a policy of primary concentration
on the younger pupils. These are introduced mainly via school
inspections and recommendations whereas the older children are
either established patients or attend at parents' spontaneous
requests. Numerically, the service is comprehensive for infant
schools but, with the exception of two secondary schools with
surgeries on the premises, it is inadequate for the older age groups.
Geographically, a number of schools are beyond reasonable distance
from the clinics and are, therefore, not well served. It is these areas
which we are hoping to cover when expansion becomes a reality.
In this Borough, ample provision for emergency treatment has
been shown to be essential. In theory, a child under regular dental
care should rarely be in need of urgent treatment for relief of pain
but our relatively high ratio of emergency attendances per session
not only points to the need of expansion of the service but also
demonstrates that general dental practitioners in the National
Health Service are unable fully to cope with the needs of the
Borough's child population.
Our pursuance of the highest of standards of dental care not only
emphasises the axiom that "only the best is good enough for the
child" but also provides for the school leaver a yardstick whereby
the quality of subsequent dental ministration and products can be
accepted or rejected. There remains, however, a problem as to
what is entailed in the term "high standard of dental care" and who
will be the arbiter. Is it to be the individual dental surgeon in
charge of the patient or the head of the service who would acquaint
himself with all possible sources of post-graduate training with the
affilliation of a teaching hospital to assist him in this direction?
With dental surgeons seeking a permanent career within the school