To discuss the practical aspects of conducting research in a primary care setting, from the perspectives of the practitioner and the research team.
Methods
Various issues are discussed, including the relevance of research questions being generated in this setting, the advantages to both parties and the processes involved in conducting a study in specialist practice. This paper describes two recent studies (a randomized clinical trial and a qualitative study) conducted within specialist practice, to illustrate some of the potential difficulties.
Conclusions
The success of conducting a study in primary care is determined by a variety of factors, including an interested specialist practitioner, motivated staff in a well-organized practice and the close support of an academic-based research team.
HarrisonJEClinical trials in orthodontics I: demographic details of clinical trials published in three orthodontic journals between 1989.and 1998. J Orthod2003; 30: 25–30.
7.
FoyR, ParryJ, DugganA, How evidence based are recruitment strategies to randomised controlled trials in primary care? Experience from seven studies. Family Practice2003; 20: 83–92.
8.
TrimpeneersLM, WijgaertsIA, GrognardNA, Effect of electric toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes on removal of plaque and periodontal status during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop1997; 111: 492–7.
9.
ClerehughV, WilliamsP, ShawWC, Practice-based randomised controlled trial of the efficiency of an electric and a manual toothbrush on gingival health in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances. J Dent1998; 26: 633–9.
10.
BurdenDJ, GarvinW, PattersonCCA field trial of an orthodontic treatment-need learning package for general dental practitioners. Br Dent J1997; 183: 123–9.
11.
O'BrienK, WrightJ, ConboyF, The effect of orthodontic referral guidelines: a randomised controlled trial. Br Dent J2000; 188: 392–7.
12.
KellyBM, SpringateSDSpecialist orthodontics in the general dental service. Br Dent J1996; 180: 209–15.
13.
SheikhA, SmeethL, AshcroftR, Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Prac2002; 52: 746–51.
14.
BennettME, TullochJFCUnderstanding orthodontic treatment satisfaction from the patients’ perspective: a qualitative approach. Clin Orthod Res1999; 2: 53–61.
15.
BennettME, TullochJFC, VigKW, Measuring orthodontic treatment satisfaction: questionnaire development and preliminary validation. J Publ Hlth Dent2001; 61: 155–60.
WardE, KingM, LloydM, Conducting randomised trials in general practice: methodological and practical issues. Br J Gen Prac1999; 49: 919–22.
18.
Van Der WindtDAWM, KoesBW, Van AarstM, Practical aspects of conducting a pragmatic randomised trial in primary care: patient recruitment and outcome assessment. Br J Gen Pract2000; 50: 371–4.
19.
NewtonJT, GibbonsDE, KavanaghD, Primary Care Research Priorities – Dentistry, Report to NHS Executive. London, 2000.
20.
LutherFThe research component in orthodontic education: sniffing out rats (SnOR). J Orthod2005; 32: 73–4.
21.
JonesCS, BillingtonRW, PearsonGJThe advantages and disadvantages of running a clinical trial in general practices. Br Dent J2004; 197: 311–13.
22.
PringleM, ChurchillRRandomised controlled trials in general practice. Br Med J1995; 311: 1382–3.
23.
BlinkhornAS, ClarksonJE, CravenR, An evaluation of a training programme in primary care research for general dental practitioners. Br Dent J 2000; 188: 333–6.
24.
HarrisonJEOrthodontic Clinical Trials III: reporting of ethical issues associated with clinical trials published in three orthodontic journals between1989. and 1998. J Orthod2005; 32: 115–21.
25.
LutherFPublishing without ethical approval. J Orthod2005; 32: 2.
26.
TognoniG, AlliC, AvanziniF, Randomised controlled trials in general practice: lessons from a failure. Br Med J1991; 303: 969–71.
