Table 3: Responses of the whole sample (n-620) to Teledentistry survey and both males (n=237) and females (n=383) dentists to Teledentistry survey.

Teledentistry sections Sample Disagree
n (%)
Neutral
n (%)
Agree
n (%)
Efficiency in patient care
Improve communications between dentists Whole 27(4.4) 125(20.2) 468(75.5)
Males 14(2.3) 44(7.1) 179(28.9)
Females 13(2.1) 81(13.1) 289(46.6)
Make referral of new patients more efficient Whole 38(6.1) 137(22.1) 445(71.8)
Males 19(3.1) 46(7.4) 172(27.7)
Females 19(3.1) 91(14.7) 273(44)
Enhance guidance and advice Whole 36(5.8) 141(22.7) 443(71.5)
Males 14(2.3) 65(10.5) 158(25.5)
Females 22(3.5) 76(12.3) 285(46)
Enhance clinical training and continuing education Whole 51(8.2) 122(19.7) 447(72.1)
Males 24(3.9) 51(8.2) 162(26.1)
Females 27(4.4) 71(11.5) 285(46)
Save time compared with a referral letter Whole 51(8.2) 115(18.5) 454(73.2)
Males 18(2.9) 47(7.6) 172(27.7)
Females 33(5.3) 68(11) 282(45.5)
Help with patient information and education Whole 31(5) 139(22.4) 450(72.6)
Males 15(2.4) 52(8.4) 170(27.4)
Females 16(2.6) 87(14) 280(45.2)
Provide adequate diagnostic information Whole 76(12.3) 160(25.8) 384(61.9)
Males 36(5.8) 67(10.8) 134(21.9)
Females 40(6.5) 93(15) 250(40)
Helpful to monitor patient’s conditiona Whole 44(7.1) 182(29.4) 394(63.5)
Males 21(3.4) 81(13.1) 135(21.8)
Females 23(3.7) 101(16.3) 259(41.8)
Useful for patients in distant or rural locations Whole 56(9) 134(21.6) 430(69.4)
Males 17(2.7) 56(9) 164(26.5)
Females 39(6.3) 78(12.6) 266(42.9)
Improve interaction and communication with patients Whole 36(5.8) 150(24.2) 434(70)
Males 14(2.3) 60(9.7) 163(26.3)
Females 22(3.5) 90(14.5) 271(43.7)
Cost reduction
Reduce costs for the dental practicesa Whole 106(17.1) 198(31.9) 316(51)
Males 32(5.2) 98(15.8) 107(17.3)
Females 74(11.9) 100(16.1) 209(33.7)
Save money for patients Whole 76(12.3) 192(31) 352(56.8)
Males 28(4.5) 70(11.3) 139(22.4)
Females 48(7.7) 122(19.7) 213(34.4)
Help reduce unnecessary travel to hospital Whole 56(9) 151(24.4) 413(66.6)
Males 19(3.1) 57(9.2) 161(26)
Females 37(6) 94(15.2) 252(40.6)
Convenient for patients and well received by patients Whole 42(6.8) 217(35) 361(58.2)
Males 17(2.7) 85(13.7) 135(21.8)
Females 25(4) 132(21.3) 226(36.5)
Help shorten waiting listsa Whole 47(7.6) 170(27.4) 403(65)
Males 16(2.6) 83(13.4) 138(22.3)
Females 31(5) 87(14) 265(42.7)
Capabilities to improve practice
Increase surgery time spent with the patient Whole 164(26.5) 206(33.2) 250(40.3)
Males 61(11.5) 84(13.5) 82(13.2)
Females 93(15) 122(19.7) 168(27.1)
Necessitate an extra appointment for taking photographsa Whole 114(10) 207(33.4) 299(48.2)
Males 62(8.4) 92(14.8) 83(13.4)
Females 52(54.6) 115(13.4) 216(34.8)
Too expensive to set up Whole 171(27.6) 254(41) 195(31.5)
Males 66(10.6) 94(15.2) 77(12.4)
Females 105(16.9) 160(25.8) 118(19)
Diagnosis is accurate of intra-oral images as in traditional clinical settinga Whole 130(21) 182(29.4) 308(49.7)
Males 79(12.7) 69(11.1) 89(14.4)
Females 51(8.2) 113(18.2) 219(35.5)
Security and confidentiality
Technical incompatibilitya Not concerned Neither Concerned
Whole 102(16.5) 285(46) 233(37.6)
Males 34(5.5) 97(15.6) 106(17.1)
Females 68(11) 188(30.3) 127(20.5)
Reliability of Equipment Whole 63(10.2) 192(31) 365(58.9)
Males 24(3.9) 76(12.3) 39(6.3)
Females 39(6.3) 116(18.7) 228(36.8)
Patient confidentiality when images are sent online to the hospitala Whole 70(11.3) 237(38.2) 313(50.5)
Males 24(3.9) 77(12.4) 136(21.9)
Females 46(7.4) 160(25.8) 177(28.5)
Potential for tampering with computer imagesa Whole 120(19.4) 181(29.2) 319(51.5)
Males 25(3.9) 73(11.8) 140(22.6)
Females 96(15.5) 108(17.4) 179(28.9)

aPearson chi-Square significant at P < 0.05.