Parental Views on Minimally Invasive Dentistry versus General Anaesthesia Extractions of Children's Compromised First Permanent Molars: An Exploratory Qualitative Study.

Introduction: The current standard of care for first permanent molars (FPMs) requiring extraction is removal of these teeth between the chronological ages of eight to ten years, as per UK guidelines. This often involves a general anaesthetic (GA) with surgical admission to hospital. This study explores parental views on minimally invasive (MI) techniques as an alternative to the UK current standard of care for extractions of FPMs deemed to require removal between the chronological ages of eight to ten years.

Methods: A qualitative investigation, using semi-structured interviews was conducted with parents/carers of children attending a teaching hospital for extraction of compromised FPMs under GA. Thematic framework analysis was used to present the findings. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) were used as a guide to ensure quality.

Results: The main themes emerging were: participants' surprise at how poor the prognosis was for their child's FPMs; acceptance that care was beyond the scope of primary care; willingness by some to undergo GA again; requests for information about the guarantee of success of MI treatment; concerns about the residual black staining from silver diamine fluoride (SDF); and acceptance of extraction spaces because of potential future failure of MI.

Conclusion: This exploratory qualitative study has shown that, while extraction of compromised FPMs under GA is accepted by most parents/carers, there appears to be a growing acceptance of MI approaches to restore FPMs instead of extraction of these teeth.