Table 2 Summary of identified themes and responses
From: A newly developed kit for dental apical root resorption detection: efficacy and acceptability
Themes | Responses | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Root resorption experience | ||||||
Often | Sometimes | Rarely | ||||
1. Frequency | 6.7% | 60.0% | 33.3% | |||
2. Standard method to detect root resorption | Periapical radiographs, orthopantomography, cone-beam computed tomography | |||||
Yes | No | |||||
3. Ever heard of using biomarkers to detect root resorption? | 40.0% | 60.0% | ||||
Opinions on root resorption detection kit | ||||||
Below average | Average | Above average | ||||
1. Usefulness | 3.3% | 46.7% | 50.0% | |||
2. Value for the money if the kit is RM50/testing | 13.3% | 63.3% | 23.3% | |||
3. Efficiency of the kit if the kit could yield results within an hour | 20.0% | 43.4% | 36.7% | |||
4. Colour detection method | 0% | 16.7% | 83.3% | |||
Acceptance of the kit | ||||||
Not likely | Neutral | Likely | ||||
1. Willingness to buy the kit | 10.0% | 43.4% | 46.6% | |||
2. Likeliness of the kit to replace or supplement the current method of detecting root resorption | 20.0% | 40.0% | 40.0% | |||
3. Likeliness to recommend to friends or colleagues | 3.3% | 46.7% | 50.0% | |||
4. Likeliness to participate in the clinical testing process | 30.0 | - | 70.0% | |||