Focus on Fluorides: Update on the Use of Fluoride for the Prevention of Dental Caries

Improving the efficacy of fluoride therapies reduces dental caries and lowers fluoride exposure.BackgroundFluoride is delivered to the teeth systemically or topically to aid in the prevention of dental caries. Systemic fluoride from ingested sources is in blood serum and can be deposited only in teeth that are forming in children. Topical fluoride is from sources such as community water, processed foods, beverages, toothpastes, mouthrinses, gels, foams, and varnishes. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the American Dental Association (ADA) have proposed changes in their long standing recommendations for the amount of fluoride in community drinking water in response to concerns about an increasing incidence of dental fluorosis in children. Current research is focused on the development of strategies to improve fluoride efficacy. The purpose of this update is to inform the reader about new research and policies related to the use of fluoride for the prevention of dental caries.MethodsReviews of the current research and recent evidence based systematic reviews on the topics of fluoride are presented. Topics discussed include: updates on community water fluoridation research and policies; available fluoride in dentifrices; fluoride varnish compositions, use, and recommendations; and other fluoride containing dental products. This update provides insights into current research and discusses proposed policy changes for the use of fluoride for the prevention of dental caries.ConclusionsThe dental profession is adjusting their recommendations for fluoride use based on current observations of the halo effect and subsequent outcomes. The research community is focused on improving the efficacy of fluoride therapies thus reducing dental caries and lowering the amount of fluoride required for efficacy.     

Evidence-based clinical recommendations for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants: a report of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs

BackgroundThis article presents evidence-based clinical recommendations for use of pit-and-fissure sealants developed by an expert panel convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. The panel addressed the following clinical questions: Under what circumstances should sealants be placed to prevent caries? Does placing sealants over early (noncavitated) lesions prevent progression of the lesion? Are there conditions that favor the placement of resin-based versus. glass ionomer cement sealants in terms of retention or caries prevention? Are there any techniques that could improve sealants&;apos; retention and effectiveness in caries prevention?Types of Studies ReviewedStaff of the ADA Division of Science conducted a MEDLINE search to identify systematic reviews and clinical studies published after the identified systematic reviews. At the panel&;apos;s request, the ADA Division of Science staff conducted additional searches for clinical studies related to specific topics. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also provided unpublished systematic reviews that since have been accepted for publication.ResultsThe expert panel developed clinical recommendations for each clinical question. The panel concluded that sealants are effective in caries prevention and that sealants can prevent the progression of early noncavitated carious lesions.Clinical ImplicationsThese recommendations are presented as a resource to be considered in the clinical decision-making process. As part of the evidence-based approach to care, these clinical recommendations should be integrated with the practitioner&;apos;s professional judgment and the patient&;apos;s needs and preferences. The evidence indicates that sealants can be used effectively to prevent the initiation and progression of dental caries.     

Twenty-month follow-up of occlusal caries lesions deemed questionable at baseline: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network

Background.A questionable occlusal caries (QOC) lesion can be defined as an occlusal surface with no radiographic evidence of caries, but caries is suspected because of clinical appearance. In this study, the authors report the results of a 20-month follow-up of these lesions.Methods.Fifty-three clinicians from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network participated in this study, recording lesion characteristics at baseline and lesion status at 20 months.Results.At baseline, 1,341 QOC lesions were examined; the treatment that was planned for 1,033 of those at baseline was monitoring (oral hygiene instruction, applying or prescribing fluoride or varnish, or both), and the remaining 308 received a sealant (n = 192) or invasive therapy (n = 116). At the 20-month visit, clinicians continued to monitor 927 (90 percent) of the 1,033 monitored lesions. Clinicians decided to seal 61 (6 percent) of the 1,033 lesions (mean follow-up, 19 months) and invasively treat 45 (4 percent) of them (mean follow-up, 15 months). Young patient age (< 18 years) (odds ratio = 3.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.7-6.8) and the lesion&apos;s being on a molar (odds ratio = 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.3-2.6) were associated with the clinician&apos;s deciding at some point after follow-up to seal the lesion or treat it invasively.Conclusions.Almost all (90 percent) QOC lesions for which the treatment planned at baseline was monitoring still were planned to undergo monitoring after 20 months. This finding suggests that noninvasive management is appropriate for these lesions.Practical Implications.Previous study results from baseline indicated a high prevalence of QOC lesions (34 percent). Clinicians should consider long-term monitoring when making treatment decisions about these lesions.     

Early childhood caries screening tools: a comparison of four approaches

BackgroundEarly childhood caries (ECC) is prevalent and consequential. Risk assessment tools have been proposed that can be used to identify children who require intensive interventions. In this study, the authors compare four approaches for identifying children needing early and intensive intervention to prevent or minimize caries experience for their accuracy and clinical usefulness.MethodsThe authors screened 229 predominantly low-income Hispanic children younger than 3 years with ECC and 242 without ECC by using the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry's Caries-risk Assessment Tool (CAT) and the optional screening measure of culturing Streptococcus mutans. The authors compared four approaches (CAT, CAT minus socioeconomic status, CAT minus socioeconomic status plus mutans streptococci [MS] and MS alone) for accuracy and clinical usefulness.ResultsThe results of the CAT demonstrated high sensitivity (100.0 percent) and negative predictive value (NPV) (100.0 percent) but low specificity (2.9 percent) and positive predictive value (PPV) (49.4 percent). The MS culture alone had the highest combination of accuracy and clinical usefulness (sensitivity, 86.5 percent; specificity, 93.4 percent; PPV, 92.5 percent; NPV, 87.9 percent). When we removed the socioeconomic status element, the CAT's performance improved.ConclusionsSalivary culture of MS alone in a population of young, low-income Hispanic childrenoutperformed the CAT and variations on the CAT for test accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) and clinical usefulness (predictive values).Clinical ImplicationsScreening for ECC by using salivary MS cultures and variations on the CAT are promising approaches for identifying children who need early and intensive intervention to prevent or minimize caries experience.     

Updated recommendations for managing the care of patients receiving oral bisphosphonate therapy: An advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs

Background and OverviewIn 2005, the American Dental Association (ADA) Council on Scientific Affairs convened an expert panel to develop clinical recommendations for dentists treating patients who are receiving oral bisphosphonate therapy. The Journal of the American Dental Association published the resulting report in 2006. This 2008 advisory statement is the first of projected periodic updates of the 2006 clinical recommendations.ConclusionThis 2008 advisory statement concludes, on the basis of a review of the current literature, that for patients receiving bisphosphonate therapy, the risk of developing bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis (BON) of the jaw apparently remains low. It also newly concludes that current screening and diagnostic tests are unreliable for predicting a patient's risk of developing the condition. This statement updates the 2006 recommendations regarding general dentistry, management of periodontal diseases, implant placement and maintenance, oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, restorative dentistry and prosthodontics, and orthodontics.     

Preventing and treating white-spot lesions associated with orthodontic treatment: a survey of general dentists and orthodontists

BackgroundThe authors investigated the prevention and treatment of white-spot lesions (WSLs) during and after orthodontic therapy from the perspective of general dentists and orthodontists.MethodsThe authors administered a cross-sectional survey to general dentists (n = 191) and orthodontists (n = 305) in Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina.ResultsSixty-nine percent of general dentists and 76 percent of orthodontists recommended in-office fluoride treatment for patients with severe WSLs immediately after orthodontic treatment. Sixty-nine percent of general dentists reported that they had treated WSLs during the previous year, and 37 percent of orthodontists reported that they had removed braces because of patients' poor oral hygiene. Sixty percent of orthodontists referred patients with WSLs to general dentists for treatment. Eighty-five percent of orthodontists responded that they encouraged patients to use a fluoride rinse as a preventive measure. More than one-third of general dentists indicated that severe WSLs after orthodontic treatment could have a negative effect on their perception of the treating orthodontist.ConclusionsWSLs are a common complication of orthodontic treatment and their presence can result in a negative perception of the treating orthodontist by the patient's general dentist.Clinical implicationsGeneral dentists and orthodontists should work together to prevent the development of WSLs in their patients. Treatment with fluoride supplements and motivating and training patients to practice good oral hygiene will help achieve this goal. Treatment after debonding should include the topical application of low concentrations of fluoride.     

At-home oral care for adults with developmental disabilities: A survey of caregivers

BackgroundLittle is known about effective at-home oral care methods for people with developmental disabilities (DDs) who are unable to perform personal preventive practices themselves and rely on caregivers for assistance.MethodsA convenience sample of 808 caregivers (84.5 percent paid, 15.5 percent family members) who accompanied adults with DDs (20 years or older) to appointments at a specialized statewide dental care system completed computer-assisted personal interview surveys. The authors used these data to investigate caregivers' at-home oral care experiences and to explore differences between caregivers who were paid and those who were family members.ResultsCaregivers reported that a high proportion (85 percent) of dentate adults with DDs received assistance with tooth cleaning. They also reported a high prevalence of dental problems, and low adherence to brushing (79 percent) and flossing (22 percent) recommendations. More caregivers reported that they felt confident assisting with brushing than with flossing (85 percent versus 54 percent). Family members and paid caregivers differed with respect to confidence and training.ConclusionsAt-home oral care, particularly flossing, presents substantial challenges for adults with DDs. Solutions must be tailored to address the different experiences and distinct needs of the family members and paid caregivers who assist these adults.Practical ImplicationsCaregivers play an important role in providing at-home oral care, and they must be included in efforts to improve oral health outcomes for people with DDs.     

Advancing infection control in dental care settings: Factors associated with dentists' implementation of guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Background and OverviewThe authors set out to identify factors associated with implementation by U.S. dentists of four practices first recommended in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Guidelines for Infection Control in Dental Health-Care Settings—2003.MethodsIn 2008, the authors surveyed a stratified random sample of 6,825 U.S. dentists. The response rate was 49 percent. The authors gathered data regarding dentists' demographic and practice characteristics, attitudes toward infection control, sources of instruction regarding the guidelines and knowledge about the need to use sterile water for surgical procedures. Then they assessed the impact of those factors on the implementation of four recommendations: having an infection control coordinator, maintaining dental unit water quality, documenting percutaneous injuries and using safer medical devices, such as safer syringes and scalpels. The authors conducted bivariate analyses and proportional odds modeling.ResultsResponding dentists in 34 percent of practices had implemented none or one of the four recommendations, 40 percent had implemented two of the recommendations and 26 percent had implemented three or four of the recommendations. The likelihood of implementation was higher among dentists who acknowledged the importance of infection control, had practiced dentistry for less than 30 years, had received more continuing dental education credits in infection control, correctly identified more surgical procedures that require the use of sterile water, worked in larger practices and had at least three sources of instruction regarding the guidelines. Dentists with practices in the South Atlantic, Middle Atlantic or East South Central U.S. Census divisions were less likely to have complied.ConclusionsImplementation of the four recommendations varied among U.S. dentists. Strategies targeted at raising awareness of the importance of infection control, increasing continuing education requirements and developing multiple modes of instruction may increase implementation of current and future Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines.The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta.The authors thank Jon Ruesch, who when this study was conducted was the director, Survey Center, American Dental Association, Chicago, for his effort in the collection of the data for this research project. Mr. Ruesch is now retired.     

A clinical evaluation of a giomer restorative system containing surface prereacted glass ionomer filler: Results from a 13-year recall examination

BackgroundThe authors' objective was to evaluate the long-term performance of a resin-based composite restorative material (Beautifil, Shofu, Kyoto, Japan) in combination with a self-etching primer (FL-Bond, Shofu) for posterior restorations.MethodsTwo clinicians placed 61 restorations, 26 Class I and 35 Class II, in 31 patients. They placed restorations while using rubber dam isolation. Two other clinicians examined the restorations according to the modified U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria, observing color match, marginal adaptation, anatomy, surface roughness, marginal staining, interfacial staining, proximal and occlusal contacts, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity and luster. Clinicians examined restorations at baseline as well as at one-, two-, four-, eight- and 13-year recall visits.ResultsAll restorations were examined at one year, 58 (95 percent) at two years, 39 (64 percent) at four years and 41 (67 percent) at eight years; at the 13-year recall examination, 41 (67 percent) either were examined or had a known outcome. Of the 41 restorations seen at the 13-year examination, 25 restorations (14 Class I and 11 Class II) were intact and acceptable, two had secondary caries and 14 either were not present or had failed (two were missing, 10 had received crowns and two had been replaced). No changes were observed in the modified USPHS criteria for 12 of the 25 restorations that were intact (48 percent). Areas of change observed in 13 of the 25 intact restorations included color match (12 percent), marginal adaptation at the occlusal (20 percent) and proximal surfaces (4 percent), marginal staining on occlusal (24 percent) and proximal surfaces (8 percent), and interfacial staining on occlusal (4 percent) and proximal surfaces (12 percent).ConclusionThe study results showed that most of the restorations observed at the 13-year recall examination maintained acceptable clinical qualities.Practical ImplicationsBeautifil restorative material demonstrated long-term successful results for restoration of posterior teeth.     

Effectiveness of a resin-modified glass ionomer liner in reducing hypersensitivity in posterior restorations: A study from the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning Network

BackgroundThe objectives of this randomized comparative effectiveness study conducted by members of the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network were to determine whether using a resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) liner reduces postoperative hypersensitivity (POH) in dentin-bonded Class I and Class II resin-based composite (RBC) restorations, as well as to identify other factors (putative risk factors) associated with increased POH.MethodsPEARL Network practitioner-investigators (P-Is) (n = 28) were trained to assess sensitivity determination, enamel and dentin caries activity rankings, evaluation for sleep bruxism, and materials and techniques used. The P-Is enrolled 341 participants who had hypersensitive posterior lesions. Participants were randomly assigned to receive an RBC restoration with or without an RMGI liner before P-Is applied a one-step, self-etching bonding agent. P-Is conducted sensitivity evaluations at baseline, at one and four weeks after treatment, and at all visits according to patient-reported outcomes.ResultsP-Is collected complete data regarding 347 restorations (339 participants) at baseline, with 341 (98 percent) (333 participants) recalled at four weeks. Treatment groups were balanced across baseline characteristics and measures. RBC restorations with or without an RMGI liner had the same one-week and four-week POH outcomes, as measured clinically (by means of cold or air stimulation) and according to patient-reported outcomes.ConclusionsUse of an RMGI liner did not reduce clinically measured or patient-reported POH in moderate-depth Class I and Class II restorations. Cold and air clinical stimulation findings were similar between groups.Practical Implications. The time, effort and expense involved in placing an RMGI liner in these moderate-depth RBC restorations may be unnecessary, as the representative liner used did not improve hypersensitivity outcomes.     

Combining ibuprofen and acetaminophen for acute pain management after third-molar extractions: Translating clinical research to dental practice

BackgroundEffective and safe drug therapy for the management of acute postoperative pain has relied on orally administered analgesics such as ibuprofen, naproxen and acetaminophen, or N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP), as well as combination formulations containing opioids such as hydrocodone with APAP. The combination of ibuprofen and APAP has been advocated in the last few years as an alternative therapy for postoperative pain management. The authors conducted a critical analysis to evaluate the scientific evidence for using the ibuprofen-APAP combination and propose clinical treatment recommendations for its use in managing acute postoperative pain in dentistry.Types of Studies ReviewedThe authors used quantitative evidence-based reviews published by the Cochrane Collaboration to determine the relative analgesic efficacy and safety of combining ibuprofen and APAP. They found additional articles by searching the Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed and http://ClinicalTrials.gov databases.ConclusionsThe results of the quantitative systematic reviews indicated that the ibuprofen-APAP combination may be a more effective analgesic, with fewer untoward effects, than are many of the currently available opioid-containing formulations. In addition, the authors found several randomized controlled trials that also indicated that the ibuprofen-APAP combination provided greater pain relief than did ibuprofen or APAP alone after third-molar extractions. The adverse effects associated with the combination were similar to those of the individual component drugs.Practical ImplicationsCombining ibuprofen with APAP provides dentists with an additional therapeutic strategy for managing acute postoperative dental pain. This combination has been reported to provide greater analgesia without significantly increasing the adverse effects that often are associated with opioid-containing analgesic combinations. When making stepwise recommendations for the management of acute postoperative dental pain, dentists should consider including ibuprofen-APAP combination therapy.     

Preventing dental caries associated with sugar-sweetened beverages

BackgroundDietary intake of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) has increased during the past 30 years, and SSB intake is associated with caries.

1. Download : Download full-size image

ConclusionsSSBs vary in the quantity and nature of sugars they contain; however, all of the sugars are fermentable by oral bacteria and potentially cariogenic.Practical ImplicationsOral health care practitioners should assess patients’ SSB intakes by asking questions regarding the quantity, frequency and duration of SSB intake. In response to individual behaviors, practitioners should tailor recommendations when providing anticipatory guidance to help patients decrease their exposure to SSBs for caries prevention. In light of the association between SSB intake and caries risk, as well as the increased consumption of SSBs, all dental practices should assess patients’ SSBs intake.     

Sealants and dental caries: Insight into dentists’ behaviors regarding implementation of clinical practice recommendations

BackgroundThe authors conducted a qualitative study of private-practice dentists in their offices by using vignette-based interviews to assess barriers to the use of evidence-based clinical recommendations in the treatment of noncavitated carious lesions.MethodsThe authors recruited 22 dentists as a convenience sample and presented them with two patient vignettes involving noncavitated carious lesions. Interviewers asked participants to articulate their thought processes as they described treatment recommendations. Participants compared their treatment plans with the American Dental Association’s recommendations for sealing noncavitated carious lesions, and they described barriers to implementing these recommendations in their practices. The authors recorded and transcribed the sessions for accuracy and themes.ResultsPersonal clinical experience emerged as the determining factor in dentists’ treatment decisions regarding noncavitated carious lesions. Additional factors were lack of reimbursement and mistrust of the recommendations. The authors found that knowledge of the recommendations did not lead to their adoption when the recommendation was incongruent with the dentist’s personal experience.ConclusionsThe authors found that ingrained practice behavior based on personal clinical experience that differed substantially from evidence-based recommendations resulted in a rejection of these recommendations.Practical ImplicationsAttempts to improve the adoption of evidence-based practice must involve more than simple dissemination of information to achieve a balance between personal clinical experience and scientific evidence.     

Vitamin and mineral supplements: Friend or foe when combined with medications?

Background.Given the prevalence of vitamin and mineral supplement use among consumers and the potential for vitamin- and mineral-drug interactions, as well as oral and systemic adverse effects of excess consumption, oral health care providers (OHCPs) should ask all patients about their use. The challenges for OHCPs are how to recognize oral and systemic manifestations of these interactions and how to safely manage the care of these patients while avoiding potential interactions.Methods.The authors reviewed the literature regarding interactions between popular vitamin and mineral supplements and medications used commonly in dentistry. They used clinical databases and decision support tools to classify interactions according to their level of patient risk. They address interactions of greatest clinical concern with a high-quality evidence-based foundation in either randomized controlled clinical trials or meta-analyses.Conclusion.Most medications used commonly in dentistry can be prescribed safely without regard to vitamin- and mineral-drug interactions. However, patients taking anticoagulants or cytochrome P450 3A4 substrates (such as clarithromycin, erythromycin, ketoconazole, itraconazole, midazolam and triazolam) in addition to specific vitamin or mineral supplements (vitamins D, E, K, calcium, fluoride, iron, magnesium, selenium or zinc) may face additional challenges. OHCPs need to recognize these potential interactions and know how to manage the care of patients who may be receiving treatment with these combination therapies.Practical Implications.Recognition and avoidance of potential vitamin- and mineral-drug interactions will help clinicians optimize patient treatment while emphasizing patient safety.     

Correlates of root caries experience in middle-aged and older adults in the Northwest Practice-based REsearch Collaborative in Evidence-based DENTistry research network

BackgroundThe authors examined the correlates of root caries experience for middle-aged adults (aged 45–64 years) and older adults (65 years and older) to test the hypothesis that the factors related to root caries are different for middle-aged adults than they are for older adults.MethodsThe authors conducted an observational cross-sectional study that focused on adult patients aged 45 to 97 years recruited from the Northwest Practice-based REsearch Collaborative in Evidence-based DENTistry research network (N = 775). The outcome variable was any root caries experience (no/yes). The authors hypothesized that sociodemographic, intra- oral and behavioral factors were root caries correlates. The authors used Poisson regression models to generate overall and age-stratified prevalence ratios (PRs) of root caries, and they used generalized estimating equations to account for practice-level clustering of participants.ResultsA total of 19.6 percent of adults had any root caries. A dentist’s assessment that the patient was at high risk of developing any caries was associated with greater prevalence of root caries experience in both middle-aged adults (PR, 2.70; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 1.63–4.46) and older adults (PR, 1.87; 95 percent CI, 1.19–2.95). The following factors were associated significantly with increased root caries prevalence but only for middle-aged adults: male sex (P = .02), self-reported dry mouth (P < .001), exposed roots (P = .03) and increased frequency of eating or drinking between meals (P = .03). No other covariates were related to root caries experience for older adults.ConclusionsWithin a practice-based research network, the factors associated with root caries experience were different for middle-aged adults than they were for older adults. Research is needed to identify relevant root caries correlates for adults 65 years and older.Practical ImplicationsInterventions aimed at preventing root caries are likely to be different for middle-aged adults than for older adults. Dentists should use root caries prevention programs that address appropriate aged-based risk factors.     

Breastfeeding: An overview of oral and general health benefits

Background

1. Download : Download full-size image

Breastfeeding is the reference against which alternative infant feeding models must be measured with regard to growth, development and other health outcomes. Although not a systematic review, this report provides an update for dental professionals, including an overview of general and oral health–related benefits associated with breastfeeding.Types of Studies ReviewedThe authors examined the literature regarding general health protections that breastfeeding confers to infants and mothers and explored associations between breastfeeding, occlusion in the primary dentition and early childhood caries. To accomplish these goals, they reviewed systematic reviews when available and supplemented them with comparative studies and with statements and reports from major nongovernmental and governmental organizations.ResultsWhen compared with health outcomes among formula-fed children, the health advantages associated with breastfeeding include a lower risk of acute otitis media, gastroenteritis and diarrhea, severe lower respiratory infections, asthma, sudden infant death syndrome, obesity and other childhood diseases and conditions. Evidence also suggests that breastfed children may develop a more favorable occlusion in the primary dentition. The results of a systematic review in which researchers examined the relationship between breastfeeding and early childhood caries were inconclusive.Conclusions and Clinical ImplicationsThe American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, Chicago, suggests that parents gently clean infants' gums and teeth after breastfeeding. The American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, Ill., recommends that breastfeeding should be exclusive for about the first six months of life and should continue, with the introduction of appropriate complementary foods, to at least age 12 months or beyond, as desired by mother and child. Dentists and staff members can take steps to ensure they are familiar with the evidence and guidelines pertaining to breastfeeding and to oral health. They are encouraged to follow the surgeon general's recommendations to promote and support optimal breastfeeding and oral health practices among their patients.     

A usability evaluation of four commercial dental computer-based patient record systems

BackgroundThe usability of dental computer-based patient record (CPR) systems has not been studied, despite early evidence that poor usability is a problem for dental CPR system users at multiple levels.MethodsThe authors conducted formal usability tests of four dental CPR systems by using a purposive sample of four groups of five novice users. The authors measured task outcomes (correctly completed, incorrectly completed and incomplete) in each CPR system while the participants performed nine clinical documentation tasks, as well as the number of usability problems identified in each CPR system and their potential relationship to task outcomes. The authors reviewed the software application design aspects responsible for these usability problems.ResultsThe range for correctly completed tasks was 16 to 64 percent, for incorrectly completed tasks 18 to 38 percent and for incomplete tasks 9 to 47 percent. The authors identified 286 usability problems. The main types were three unsuccessful attempts, negative affect and task incorrectly completed. They also identified six problematic interface and interaction designs that led to usability problems.ConclusionThe four dental CPR systems studied have significant usability problems for novice users, resulting in a steep learning curve and potentially reduced system adoption.Clinical ImplicationsThe significant number of data entry errors raises concerns about the quality of documentation in clinical practice.     

Concordance between clinical practice and published evidence: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network

BackgroundDocumenting the gap between what is occurring in clinical practice and what published research findings suggest should be happening is an important step toward improving care. The authors conducted a study to quantify the concordance between clinical practice and published evidence across preventive, diagnostic and treatment procedures among a sample of dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (“the network”).MethodsNetwork dentists completed one questionnaire about their demographic characteristics and another about how they treat patients across 12 scenarios/clinical practice behaviors. The authors coded responses to each scenario/clinical practice behavior as consistent (“1”) or inconsistent (“0”) with published evidence, summed the coded responses and divided the sum by the number of total responses to create an overall concordance score. The overall concordance score was calculated as the mean percentage of responses that were consistent with published evidence.ResultsThe authors limited analyses to participants in the United States (N = 591). The study results show a mean concordance at the practitioner level of 62 percent (SD = 18 percent); procedure-specific concordance ranged from 8 to 100 percent. Affiliation with a large group practice, being a female practitioner and having received a dental degree before 1990 were independently associated with high concordance (≥ 75 percent).ConclusionDentists reported a medium-range concordance between practice and published evidence.Practical ImplicationsEfforts to bring research findings into routine practice are needed.