View report page

SCHOOL DENTAL SERVICE
The Principal School Dental Officer reports for the year 1966 as follows:-
Treatment provided by the dental service during 1966 followed the pattern of the preceding year so
closely that many detailed comments made in the report of 1965 need not be repeated here.
The statistics set out in the table at the end of this report include the year under review with those
for the previous year alongside for comparison. It will be seen that in many instances there is no
significant difference, although there has been an increase in the overall 'productivity' of the service
despite a reduction in the number of treatment sessions.
As the figures speak for themselves, detailed comment will be restricted to those showing a
significant difference, or where amplification or further interpretation would be informative.
Inspection and Treatment
In the year under review the number of pupils as at 31st December was 34369, this being an increase
of 1213 over the comparable figure the previous year.
Routine dental inspections in schools occupied 223 sessions during which 19121 children were
examined, while a further 3216 were first examined in the clinics. Together these totalled 22337, which
represents 64.9% of our school population.
In addition, a further 3367 were re-examined either at the clinics or in schools after a previous course
of treatment had been completed earlier in the year.
From the total of 25704 first or re-examined, treatment was required by 14,127 representing 54.9%
which is a gratifying improvement compared with 62.5% the previous year.
Of those found to require treatment, about two-thirds avail themselves of our service and the
remainder - apart from the very small hard-core who avoid treatment from any source except for relief of
pain - attend a general dental practitioner in the National Health Service. The Executive Council list
shows that no less than 87 such practitioners have surgeries in Haringey so there is every opportunity
for children to obtain their treatment on a 'family dentist' basis, which would be ideal in ensuring regular
attention from someone known and trusted and attended with other members of the family as a normal part
of life's routine.
In fact, routine attendance is less usual than is desirable, and it is beyond doubt that the findings
at school inspections, with the consequent encouragement of persuasion that necessary treatment should
be provided, forms a valuable part of our service.
Sessions devoted to treatment numbered 3802, during which total attendances for treatment were
28396 and a further 5137 appointments were not kept, which latter figure shows a considerable reduction
as compared with the previous year and merits comment.
It is inevitable that, from so large a total number of appointments given, there will be a considerable
number not kept for good and sufficient reasons which we must accept. We recognise that the natural
forgetfulness of children will account for a further number and that a few will seek to avoid treatment by
deliberately breaking appointments. The foregoing represent a virtually irreducible number unless we
introduce a complicated system far beyond the limits of clerical time possible.
We have, however, brought into effect a system which imposes little burden in the way of clerical
work and has resulted in a reduction of 20% in the total of appointments broken. At the same time, we
are safeguarded against a charge that following a failed appointment we did nothing further to try and
ensure the resumption of treatment.
In 1965, the fai lures compared with attendances was 22.5% which, looked at in a different way, was
18.4% of the total attendances expected. For the year under review, these figures were reduced to 18.1%
and 15.4% respectively.
Appointments fai led are not necessarily always wasted, as cancellation even at the last moment may
still allow more treatment for the previous patient, or a return to punctuality upset earlier by more lengthy
treatment having been found necessary for a previous patient. Thus, the time of the failed appointment
is usefully distributed for the benefit of one or more other patients, although still recorded as a failure
to attend.
76