STATE DENTAL SYSTEM

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 16836, 27 December 1928, Page 8

STATE DENTAL SYSTEM

COMPARISON WITH BRISBANE EFFICIENCY OF DOMINION CLINICS From tin l point of view of cfiicioney, (‘<•0110110', nnd tho st:iml;'ii'<l of t rent mo of performed. the denl'il service provided for iho school children of Now Zealand does not suffer by comparison with iho travelling elinie operating in Brisbane, according to a report sulmiiiloil to the Minister of Ii oa Ith, lion. A. .I'. Stall wart !i y, by the di roe tor of The .New Zealand Division of Dental Hygiene. In Brisbane the initial cost of a dental ambulance and equipment is £n!H 10s dll. and in New Zealand Hie initial cost of equipment is only .£‘>3. The New Zealand Government subsidy for the erection of a “B” type elinie amounts to approximately £l3O. In Brisbane, the annual expenses, after deducting the fees received from adult patients, total £llß*l. The annual cost in New Zealand where no fees are received is £2Ol, which includes dental supplies for the year. Supplies are not included in the cost of Iho Brisbane service. The total operations performed in Brisbane numbered 3270 for a year, and in the same period in New Zealand there were 233;>. The Australian service performs operations at an average cost of .7.2 .shillings, whereas the New Zealand cost is onlv 2.3 shillings.

In discussing the question of dental ambulances, the report, points out that Queensland’s climatic conditions and roads’ arc much more luvorable Ilian those in New Zealand. Dental ambulances would not be able |o operate ill sin'll disl riels as Central Otago, where, during several months of the year, tin' thermometer is extremely low, and where, last year, the water had to be obtained from a river, as all the oilier sources were frozen. Even drugs in bottles had to be thawed. A dental ambulance was tried out in the North Auckland district some years ago, but. in many respects it diil not. prove satisfactory. The director points out that, one most important point 111 favor of a stationary clinic in use in New Zealand is that reasonably good aseptic conditions are assured. The Brisbane system, on which this comparison has |,',.en made, is more on the lines of an itinerant service than regular systematic treatment, as provided by the New Zealand Government.