SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Medical Records / 2026 / Sayı: 1

Talking Time of Patients During Initial Examination: A Comparative Analysis of Endodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics

İlk Muayenede Hastaların Konuşma Süreleri: Endodonti ve Ağız, Diş ve Çene Cerrahisi Kliniklerinin Karşılaştırmalı Analizi

Emine Şimşek(mersin üniversitesi diş hekimliği fakültesi)0000-0001-9195-2012
Elif Esra Özmen(KARAMANOĞLU MEHMETBEY ÜNİVERSİTESİ, AHMET KELEŞOĞLU DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0003-1920-4655
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-03-17
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: In conclusion, this study demonstrated that patient talking time is influenced by individual factors such as age and systemic diseases.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: This study aimed to compare the talking times of patients who presented for the first time to the Endodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) clinics.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: The study included a total of 200 adult patients, comprising 100 patients from the Endodontics clinic and 100 patients from the OMFS clinic.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: In conclusion, this study demonstrated that patient talking time is influenced by individual factors such as age and systemic diseases.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:endodonti · Ağız Diş ve Çene Cerrahisi · ilk muayene

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to compare the talking times of patients who presented for the first time to the Endodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) clinics. Material and Methods: The study included a total of 200 adult patients, comprising 100 patients from the Endodontics clinic and 100 patients from the OMFS clinic. Only patients who were visiting the clinics for the first time were included. Patients were asked the question "What is your complaint?" and their talking times were recorded uninterruptedly using a stopwatch. Talking times were analyzed according to gender, age group, and the presence of systemic diseases. Statistical evaluations were performed using independent sample t-tests and one-way ANOVA tests. A p-value of 0.05). Similarly, no significant difference was observed based on gender. However, significant differences were detected in talking times according to age groups and the presence of systemic diseases (p<0.05). Notably, the 41–50 age group had longer talking times. Additionally, diabetic patients in the OMFS group and patients with prostate disease in the Endodontics group exhibited longer talking times compared to other patients. Conclusion: In conclusion, this study demonstrated that patient talking time is influenced by individual factors such as age and systemic diseases. Future studies are recommended to include larger patient samples and multi-center designs, along with the evaluation of socio-demographic variables.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada Endodonti ve Ağız Diş ve Çene Cerrahisi (ADÇC) kliniğine ilk kez başvuran hastaların konuşma sürelerinin karşılaştırması hedeflenmiştir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmaya, Endodonti (100 hasta) ve ADÇC (100 hasta) kliniklerine başvuran toplam 200 yetişkin hasta dahil edilmiştir. Çalışmaya yalnızca kliniğe ilk kez başvuran hastalar dahil edilmiştir. Hastalara "Şikayetiniz nedir?" sorusu yöneltilmiş ve konuşma süreleri kesintisiz şekilde kronometre ile ölçülmüştür. Konuşma süresi ölçümleri, cinsiyet, yaş grubu ve sistemik hastalık varlığına göre analiz edilmiştir. İstatistiksel değerlendirmelerde bağımsız örneklem t testi ve tek yönlü ANOVA testi kullanılmıştır. İstatistiksel anlamlılık düzeyi p 0,05). Cinsiyete göre de konuşma süresi açısından anlamlı bir fark saptanmamıştır. Ancak yaş grupları ve sistemik hastalık varlığına göre konuşma süreleri arasında anlamlı farklılıklar tespit edilmiştir (p<0,05). Özellikle 41-50 yaş grubunda konuşma süresinin daha uzun olduğu gözlenmiştir. Ayrıca ADÇC hastalarında diyabet, Endodonti hastalarında ise prostat hastalığı bulunan bireylerin konuşma sürelerinin diğer gruplara göre daha uzun olduğu belirlenmiştir. Sonuç: Sonuç olarak çalışmamızda; hasta konuşma süresi yaş ve sistemik hastalık gibi bireysel faktörlerden etkilenmiştir. Gelecek çalışmalarda, daha fazla hasta ve farklı merkezlerde yapılacak araştırmalarla, sosyo-demografik özelliklerin etkisinin de incelenmesi önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Şimşek, E., Özmen, E. E. (2026). Talking Time of Patients During Initial Examination: A Comparative Analysis of Endodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics. Medical Records, Sayı: 1. https://doi.org/10.37990/medr.1746716

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Levinson W, Lesser CS, Epstein RM. Developing physician communication skills for patient-centered care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(7):1310–1318. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0450
  2. Marvel MK, Epstein RM, Flowers K, Beckman HB. Soliciting the patient’s agenda: have we improved? JAMA. 1999;281(3):283–287. doi:10.1001/jama.281.3.283
  3. Stewart MA. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. CMAJ. 1995;152(9):1423–1430.
  4. Ong LM, de Haes JC, Hoos AM, Lammes FB. Doctor-patient communication: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med. 1995;40(7):903–918. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)00155-M
  5. Epstein RM, Franks P, Shields CG, Meldrum SC, Miller KN, Campbell TL, et al. Patient-centered communication and diagnostic testing. Ann Fam Med. 2005;3(5):415–421. doi:10.1370/afm.348
  6. Zolnierek KBH, DiMatteo MR. Physician communication and patient adherence to treatment: a meta-analysis. Med Care. 2009;47(8):826–834. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e31819a5acc
  7. Langewitz W, Denz M, Keller A, Kiss A, Rütimann S, Wössmer B. Spontaneous talking time at start of consultation in outpatient clinic: cohort study. BMJ. 2002;325(7366):682–683. doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7366.682
  8. Şenol G, Burgaz İ, Tüfekçioğlu Ş, Uçkan S. Çene cerrahisi hastaları ilk muayenede ne kadar süre konuşuyorlar? 7tepe Klin. 2019;15(1):21–23. doi:10.5505/yeditepe.2019.17362
  9. Atilla G, Oksay A, Erdem R. Hekim-Hasta İletişimi Üzerine Nitel Bir Ön Çalışma. İstanbul Üniv İlet Fak Derg. 2012;43:23–37. doi:10.17064/iuifhd.95420
  10. Shah PK, Chong BS. Endodontic diagnosis. In: Endodontic Advances and Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines. 2022. p. 685–718. doi:10.1002/9781119553939.ch26
  11. Israel HA. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in Patients With Chronic Orofacial Pain. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;63(1):127. doi:10.1016/S0278-2391(03)00134-6
  12. Roter D, Hall JA. Doctors Talking with Patients/Patients Talking with Doctors. 2nd ed. Westport (CT): Praeger; 2006.
  13. Sandvik M, Eide H, Lind M, Graugaard PK, Torper J, Finset A. Analyzing medical dialogues: strength and weakness of Roter’s interaction analysis system (RIAS). Patient Educ Couns. 2002;46(4):235–241. doi:10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00014-9
  14. Melin I, Karlström B, Berglund L, Zamfir M, Rössner S. Education and supervision of health care professionals to initiate, implement and improve management of obesity. Patient Educ Couns. 2005;58(2):127–136. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2004.08.010
  15. Street RL Jr, Makoul G, Arora NK, Epstein RM. How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician–patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;74(3):295–301. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2008.11.015
  16. Thompson TL, Parrott R, Nussbaum JF. The Routledge Handbook of Health Communication. 2nd ed. New York (NY): Routledge; 2011.
  17. Waitzkin H. Information giving in medical care. J Health Soc Behav. 1985;26(2):81–101.
  18. Epstein RM, Hadee T, Carroll J, Meldrum SC, Lardner J, Shields CG. “Could this be something serious?” Reassurance, uncertainty, and empathy in response to patients’ expressions of worry. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(12):1731–1739. doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0410-6