Cross-sectional survey assesses knowledge and attitudes of dentists toward pregnant patients, highlighting barriers.
Objectives: The study assessed knowledge, attitude, and practices of dentists towards treating pregnant patients. Methods: It was based on a cross-sectional, electronically administered survey of a convenience sample of Russian dentists conducted between March and April 2025. Our questionnaire was developed based on international guidelines and previously published surveys and validated through expert review and pilot testing. It contains four sections: Demographics, Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice. The overall knowledge and attitude scores were calculated and compared across subgroups based on gender, specialty, and experience using the Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn’s tests. Spearman’s coefficient was calculated to reveal pair-wise correlations between knowledge, attitude, and age of the participants. Results: Overall, 403 dentists completed the questionnaire. The majority of the participants (53%) demonstrated fair knowledge about providing dental care throughout pregnancy. Female dentists had a significantly higher median knowledge score compared with that of males; orthodontists and prosthetic dentists showed lower knowledge scores than other specialists. All participants demonstrated a positive attitude toward treating pregnant patients; however, a considerable number of dentists agreed that they do not feel comfortable treating pregnant women and prefer not to do that. A large majority of dental practitioners (83%) indicated that they had treated pregnant women. Liability concerns (42%) and a lack of knowledge (24%) were reported as the main barriers for providing dental care to pregnant patients. Conclusions: It can be concluded that insufficient knowledge influenced by gender and specialty is one of the key barriers to the dental treatment of pregnant women, despite generally positive attitudes of the practitioners.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Babina et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: