Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Survey evaluates referral patterns and perceptions among dentists and endodontists, highlighting communication gaps.
INTRODUCTION: The professional relationship between general practitioners (GPs) and endodontists is essential for high-quality patient care. The purpose of this study was to provide a dual-perspective evaluation of the referral patterns and professional perceptions held by both referring dentists (RDs) and endodontists (EDs) to identify modern barriers to effective collaboration. METHODS: An anonymous 22-item online survey was distributed to EDs and RDs through professional networks and social media. The questionnaire addressed demographics, clinical workflows, and professional perceptions. Data were analyzed using Pearson chi-squared tests and binary logistic regression (p < 0.05). RESULTS: A total of 1,352 responses were analyzed (793 EDs, 559 RDs). Clinical procedural problems were the primary driver for referral for both RDs (47.2%) and EDs (50.7%). However, significant perceptual gaps were identified: 30% of RDs believed restorability assessment was primarily the endodontist's responsibility, compared to 20.6% of EDs (p < 0.05). Although RDs reported high satisfaction with specialist reports, 44.2% of EDs found referral letters inadequate more than 30% of the time. While both groups prioritized phone communication for relationship maintenance (RD: 51.4%; ED: 25.7%), EDs placed a significantly higher value on personal office visits (18.2%) than RDs (7.4%). Relationship termination also differed, with RDs most commonly citing patient dissatisfaction (30.7%) and EDs citing divergent treatment philosophy (40.0%) as the primary reasons for discontinuing referral. CONCLUSIONS: The RD-ED referral pathway is characterized by shared clinical goals but significant discrepancies in documentation expectations and responsibility for restorability. Implementing standardized referral templates and improving bidirectional communication of restorative intent are essential for reducing professional friction and enhancing the continuity of patient care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karia et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: