Skip header and navigation

Refine By

15 records – page 1 of 2.

A 24-month evaluation of amalgam and resin-based composite restorations: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature113423
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Jun;144(6):583-93
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2013
Author
Michael S McCracken
Valeria V Gordan
Mark S Litaker
Ellen Funkhouser
Jeffrey L Fellows
Douglass G Shamp
Vibeke Qvist
Jeffrey S Meral
Gregg H Gilbert
Author Affiliation
Department of Clinical and Community Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Alabama at Birmingham, AL, USA.
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Jun;144(6):583-93
Date
Jun-2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adolescent
Adult
Age Factors
Aged
Child
Child, Preschool
Cohort Studies
Community-Based Participatory Research
Composite Resins - standards
Dental Amalgam - standards
Dental Materials - standards
Dental Prosthesis Repair - statistics & numerical data
Dental Restoration Failure - statistics & numerical data
Dental Restoration, Permanent - classification - standards
Dentists - statistics & numerical data
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Forecasting
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Risk factors
Scandinavia
Sex Factors
Surface Properties
United States
Workload
Young Adult
Abstract
Knowing which factors influence restoration longevity can help clinicians make sound treatment decisions. The authors analyzed data from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network to identify predictors of early failures of amalgam and resin-based composite (RBC) restorations.
In this prospective cohort study, the authors gathered information from clinicians and offices participating in the network. Clinicians completed a baseline data collection form at the time of restoration placement and annually thereafter. Data collected included patient factors, practice factors and dentist factors, and the authors analyzed them by using mixed-model logistic regression.
A total of 226 practitioners followed up 6,218 direct restorations in 3,855 patients; 386 restorations failed (6.2 percent) during the mean (standard deviation) follow-up of 23.7 (8.8) months. The number of tooth surfaces restored at baseline helped predict subsequent restoration failure; restorations with four or more restored surfaces were more than four times more likely to fail. Restorative material was not associated significantly with longevity; neither was tooth type. Older patient age was associated highly with failure (P
Notes
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2005 Jun;136(6):790-616022046
Cites: Clin Oral Investig. 2003 Jun;7(2):63-7012768463
Cites: JAMA. 2006 Apr 19;295(15):1775-8316622139
Cites: J Dent. 2006 Aug;34(7):427-3516314023
Cites: Dent Mater J. 2006 Sep;25(3):611-517076335
Cites: J Dent. 2007 Feb;35(2):124-916956709
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2007 Jun;138(6):763-7217545265
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2007 Jun;138(6):775-8317545266
Cites: Public Health Rep. 2007 Sep-Oct;122(5):657-6317877313
Cites: J Adhes Dent. 2007 Oct;9(5):469-7518297828
Cites: Br Dent J. 2003 Jun 14;194(11):613-8; discussion 60912819697
Cites: J Dent. 2012 Oct;40(10):829-3522771415
Cites: J Dent. 2003 Aug;31(6):395-40512878022
Cites: J Med Syst. 2003 Oct;27(5):445-5614584621
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2004 May;135(5):637-4515202758
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1988 May;116(6):651-43164030
Cites: J Dent. 1996 Jul;24(4):257-628783530
Cites: Oper Dent. 1994 Jul-Aug;19(4):127-329028231
Cites: Br Dent J. 1997 May 24;182(10):373-819185355
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 Dec;129(12):1757-99854929
Cites: Environ Health Perspect. 2008 Mar;116(3):394-918335109
Cites: J Dent. 2008 May;36(5):343-5018313826
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Apr;141(4):441-820354094
Cites: J Dent. 2005 Nov;33(10):827-3516246480
Cites: J Dent. 2012 May;40(5):397-40522342563
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 1999 Oct;57(5):257-6210614902
Cites: J Dent. 2000 Feb;28(2):111-610666968
Cites: J Adhes Dent. 2001 Spring;3(1):45-6411317384
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2001 Apr;59(2):57-6211370750
Cites: Community Dent Health. 2001 Dec;18(4):236-4111789702
Cites: Oper Dent. 2002 Sep-Oct;27(5):488-9212216568
Cites: Community Dent Health. 2010 Mar;27(1):18-2220426256
Cites: J Dent Res. 2010 Oct;89(10):1063-720660797
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Apr;142(4):429-4021454850
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Jun;142(6):622-3221628683
Cites: Dent Mater. 2012 Jan;28(1):87-10122192253
Cites: Bull Environ Contam Toxicol. 2012 May;88(5):797-80122395198
Comment In: J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Nov;144(11):1220, 122224177394
Comment In: J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Nov;144(11):122024177393
PubMed ID
23729455 View in PubMed
Less detail

Dentists in practice-based research networks have much in common with dentists at large: evidence from the Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature148048
Source
Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-5
Publication Type
Article
Author
Sonia K Makhija
Gregg H Gilbert
D Brad Rindal
Paul L Benjamin
Joshua S Richman
Daniel J Pihlstrom
Author Affiliation
Department of Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Dentistry, AL, USA.
Source
Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-5
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Community-Based Participatory Research - organization & administration
Dental Research - organization & administration
Dentist's Practice Patterns - statistics & numerical data
Ethnic Groups - statistics & numerical data
Female
Humans
Male
Questionnaires
Scandinavia
Translational Medical Research - organization & administration
United States
Abstract
Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) aim to improve clinical practice by engaging dental practitioners in studies that are directly relevant to daily clinical practice. The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) consists of dentists from seven U.S. states and three Scandinavian countries. All DPBRN dentists complete an enrollment questionnaire about their practices and themselves; as of this writing, 1,086 have done so. To quantify the similarities between DPBRN dentists and U.S. dentists at large, this article compared DPBRN practice characteristics to those of dentists who responded to the 2004 ADA Survey of dental practice, which is not limited to ADA members. DPBRN dentists were similar to U.S. dentists in terms of gender, race, ethnicity, number of offices, percentage of patients with insurance coverage, number of operatories, patient visits per week, days for a new appointment, and waiting room time. DPBRN dentists were statistically more likely to be recent graduates. The commonalities should increase the likelihood that DPBRN studies will be applicable to U.S. practices, thereby fostering knowledge transfer in both research-to-practice and practice-to-research.
Notes
Cites: BMJ. 2001 Mar 10;322(7286):567-811238139
Cites: Ann Fam Med. 2007 May-Jun;5(3):242-5017548852
Cites: N Engl J Med. 2001 Jun 28;344(26):2021-511430334
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2003 Jan;134(1):103-712555963
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2003 May;134(5):621-712785498
Cites: N Engl J Med. 2003 Aug 28;349(9):868-7412944573
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2003 Dec;134(12):1630-4014719761
Cites: Med Care. 2004 Apr;42(4 Suppl):III45-915026664
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 Oct;129(10):1474-99787548
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1997 May;128(5):651-39150651
Cites: Ann Fam Med. 2004 Sep-Oct;2(5):425-815506575
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 Nov;129(11):1615-219818583
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1999 Mar;130(3):424-3010085668
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2004 Oct;135(10):1362, 1364, 136615551971
Cites: Ann Fam Med. 2005 May-Jun;3 Suppl 1:S12-2015928213
Cites: Ann Fam Med. 2005 May-Jun;3 Suppl 1:S5-1115928219
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2005 Jun;136(6):728-3716022037
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2005 Feb;63(1):1-916095055
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;19(1):1-1016491999
Cites: Pediatrics. 2006 Aug;118(2):e228-3416831892
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Nov;137(11):1488-90, 1492, 149417082265
Cites: JAMA. 2007 Jan 24;297(4):403-617244837
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;20(2):204-1917341758
Cites: BMJ. 2001 Mar 10;322(7286):588-9011238155
PubMed ID
19819818 View in PubMed
Less detail

Dentists' use of caries risk assessment in children: findings from the Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature143506
Source
Gen Dent. 2010 May-Jun;58(3):230-4
Publication Type
Article
Author
Joseph L Riley
Vebeke Qvist
Jeffrey L Fellows
D Brad Rindal
Joshua S Richman
Gregg H Gilbert
Valeria V Gordan
Author Affiliation
Department of Community Dentistry and Behavioral Science, College of Dentistry, University of Florida in Gainesville, USA.
Source
Gen Dent. 2010 May-Jun;58(3):230-4
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adolescent
Adult
Child
Child, Preschool
Community Dentistry - statistics & numerical data
Dental Caries - prevention & control
Dental Caries Susceptibility
Dental Research - organization & administration
Dentist's Practice Patterns - statistics & numerical data
Female
Humans
Male
Risk Assessment - utilization
Scandinavia
United States
Abstract
This study surveyed Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) member dentists (from four regions in the U.S. and Scandinavia) who perform restorative dentistry in their practices. The survey asked a range of questions about caries risk assessment in patients aged 6 to 18. Among respondents, 73% of dentists reported performing caries risk assessment among these patients, while 14% assessed caries risk by using a special form. Regions in which most dentists were in a private practice model were the least likely to perform caries risk assessment, while regions where most dentists practiced in a large group practice model were the most likely to use a special form for caries risk assessment. Recent graduates from dental school were more likely to use a caries risk assessment compared to older graduates. Current oral hygiene, decreased salivary flow, and the presence of active caries were rated as the most important caries factors. Some differences by region were also evident for the risk factor ratings. These results suggest that not all community dentists assess caries risk. The results of this study also indicate considerable variability in dentists' views concerning the importance of specific caries risk factors in treatment planning and weak evidence that caries risk assessment is driving clinical practice when preventive treatment recommendations are being considered.
Notes
Cites: J Dent Educ. 1999 Oct;63(10):745-710572540
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2001 Oct;65(10):1009-1611699971
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2001 Oct;65(10):1017-2311699972
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2001 Oct;65(10):1063-7211699978
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2001 Oct;65(10):1126-3211699989
Cites: J Dent Res. 2002 Jul;81(7):455-812161455
Cites: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997 Feb;25(1):97-1039088698
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 1998 Jun;56(3):179-869688230
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2005 May;69(5):538-5415897335
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 2005 Spring;65(2):76-8115929544
Cites: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2005 Aug;33(4):256-6416008632
Cites: Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005 Nov;15(6):420-816238652
Cites: Pediatr Dent. 2005-2006;27(7 Suppl):84-616541901
Cites: Int J Paediatr Dent. 2006 May;16(3):152-6016643535
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 2006 Summer;66(3):169-7316913242
Cites: Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2006 Mar;7(1):31-717140525
Cites: Int Dent J. 2007 Jun;57(3):177-8317695739
Cites: J Calif Dent Assoc. 2007 Oct;35(10):703-7, 710-318044378
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jan;139(1):74-8118167389
Cites: Oral Health Prev Dent. 2007;5(4):299-30618173091
Cites: Pediatr Dent. 2008 Jan-Feb;30(1):49-5318402099
Cites: Int J Paediatr Dent. 2008 Jul;18(4):275-8318284473
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
PubMed ID
20478803 View in PubMed
Less detail

Electronic dental record use and clinical information management patterns among practitioner-investigators in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature117584
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Jan;144(1):49-58
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-2013
Author
Titus Schleyer
Mei Song
Gregg H Gilbert
D Brad Rindal
Jeffrey L Fellows
Valeria V Gordan
Ellen Funkhouser
Author Affiliation
Center for Dental Informatics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, 3501 Terrace St., Suite 339, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA. titus@pitt.edu
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Jan;144(1):49-58
Date
Jan-2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Appointments and Schedules
Attitude of Health Personnel
Attitude to Computers
Community-Based Participatory Research
Computer Systems - utilization
Data Mining - utilization
Dental Informatics
Dental Records - classification
Dental Research
Dentists - psychology
Diagnosis, Oral
Electronic Health Records - utilization
Female
Group Practice, Dental - organization & administration
Health Information Management
Humans
Male
Medical History Taking
Patient Care Planning
Practice Management, Dental - organization & administration
Private Practice - organization & administration
Radiography, Dental
Scandinavia
United States
Abstract
The growing availability of electronic data offers practitioners increased opportunities for reusing clinical data for research and quality improvement. However, relatively little is known about what clinical data practitioners keep on their computers regarding patients.
The authors conducted a web-based survey of 991 U.S. and Scandinavian practitioner-investigators (P-Is) in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network to determine the extent of their use of computers to manage clinical information; the type of patient information they kept on paper, a computer or both; and their willingness to reuse electronic dental record (EDR) data for research.
A total of 729 (73.6 percent) of 991 P-Is responded.A total of 73.8 percent of U.S. solo practitioners and 78.7 percent of group practitioners used a computer to manage some patient information, and 14.3 percent and 15.9 percent, respectively, managed all patient information on a computer. U.S. practitioners stored appointments, treatment plans, completed treatment and images electronically most frequently, and the periodontal charting, diagnosis, medical history, progress notes and the chief complaint least frequently.More than 90 percent of Scandinavian practitioners stored all information electronically.A total of 50.8 percent of all P-Is were willing to reuse EDR data for research, and 63.1 percent preferred electronic forms for data collection.
The results of this study show that the trend toward increased adoption of EDRs in the United States is continuing, potentially making more data in electronic form available for research. Participants appear to be willing to reuse EDR data for research and to collect data electronically.
The rising rates of EDR adoption may offer increased opportunities for reusing electronic data for quality improvement and research.
Notes
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2011 Apr;75(4):453-6521460266
Cites: BMJ. 2003 May 17;326(7398):107012750210
Cites: Med Care Res Rev. 2010 Oct;67(5):503-2720150441
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 2009 Sep 1;151(5):338-4019638402
Cites: Contemp Clin Trials. 2009 Jul;30(4):300-1619345286
Cites: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 May-Jun;16(3):409-1219261944
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2008 Jul-Aug;21(4):356-718612063
Cites: Clin Trials. 2008;5(1):75-8418283084
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jan;139(1):74-8118167389
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;20(2):196-20317341757
Cites: Inform Prim Care. 2006;14(3):203-917288707
Cites: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 May-Jun;13(3):344-5216501177
Cites: J Can Dent Assoc. 2006 Mar;72(2):14516545175
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;19(1):93-716492011
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2005 Jun;136(6):728-3716022037
Cites: Ann Fam Med. 2005 May-Jun;3 Suppl 1:S21-915928215
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 2005 Winter;65(1):21-3515751492
Cites: Scand J Prim Health Care. 2004 Mar;22(1):6-1015119513
Cites: Br Dent J. 2003 Nov 22;195(10):585-90; discussion 57914631436
Cites: BMC Oral Health. 2009;9:2619832991
PubMed ID
23283926 View in PubMed
Less detail

The feasibility of a clinical trial of pain related to temporomandibular muscle and joint disorders: the results of a survey from the Collaboration on Networked Dental and Oral Research dental practice-based research networks.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature117583
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Jan;144(1):e1-10
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-2013
Author
Ana M Velly
Eric L Schiffman
D Brad Rindal
Joana Cunha-Cruz
Gregg H Gilbert
Maryann Lehmann
Allan Horowitz
James Fricton
Author Affiliation
Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Community Studies, Department of Dentistry, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. ana.velly@mcgill.ca
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Jan;144(1):e1-10
Date
Jan-2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Analgesics - therapeutic use
Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal - therapeutic use
Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic - therapeutic use
Attitude of Health Personnel
Community-Based Participatory Research
Dental Research
Dentists - psychology
Facial Pain - diagnosis
Feasibility Studies
Female
General Practice, Dental
Headache - diagnosis
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Mouth Protectors - statistics & numerical data
Nonprescription Drugs - therapeutic use
Occlusal Splints - statistics & numerical data
Prescription Drugs - therapeutic use
Primary Health Care
Questionnaires
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Scandinavia
Self Care
Temporomandibular Joint Disorders - diagnosis - drug therapy - therapy
Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction Syndrome - diagnosis - drug therapy - therapy
Treatment Outcome
United States
Abstract
The authors conducted a survey to characterize the strategies used by general dentists to manage pain related to temporomandibular muscle and joint disorders (TMJDs) and to assess the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to determine the effectiveness of these strategies.
Dentists from three dental practice-based research networks (PBRNs) (The Dental Practice-Based Research Network, Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning Network and Northwest Practice-based REsearch Collaborative in Evidence-based DENTistry) agreed to participate in this survey.
Of 862 dentists surveyed, 654 were general dentists who treated TMJDs; among these, 80.3 percent stated they would participate in a future RCT. Dentists treated an average of three patients with TMJD-related pain per month. Splints or mouthguards (97.6 percent), self-care (85.9 percent) and over-the-counter or prescribed medications (84.6 percent) were the treatments most frequently used. The treatments dentists preferred to compare in an RCT were splint or mouthguard therapy (35.8 percent), self-care (27.4 percent) and medication (17.0 percent).
Most general dentists treat TMJD-related pain, and initial reversible care typically is provided. It is feasible to conduct an RCT in a dental PBRN to assess the effectiveness of splint or mouthguard therapy, self-care or medication for the initial management of painful TMJD.
There is an opportunity to do an RCT in a dental PBRN, which could lead to the development of evidence-based treatment guidelines for the initial treatment of TMJD-related pain by primary care dentists.
Notes
Cites: J Chronic Dis. 1967 Aug;20(8):637-484860352
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2004 Spring;18(2):114-2515250431
Cites: Br Dent J. 2004 Jul 10;197(1):35-41; discussion 31; quiz 50-115243608
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2004 Winter;18(1):9-22; discussion 23-3215022533
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Oct;142(10):1183-9121965492
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2002 Winter;16(1):64-7011889661
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2002 Winter;16(1):48-6311889659
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2000 Feb;131(2):202-1010680388
Cites: Pain. 1999 Dec;83(3):549-6010568864
Cites: Am Psychol. 1978 Sep;33(9):821-30707872
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1979 Dec 27;301(26):1410-2514321
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1987 Jul 16;317(3):141-53600702
Cites: J Craniomandib Disord. 1991 Summer;5(3):205-121812149
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 1995 Spring;9(2):192-97488989
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 1996 Jun;54(3):154-98811136
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1996 Nov;127(11):1595-6068952234
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 1997 Spring;11(2):139-4610332320
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1999 Aug 12;341(7):531-410441613
Cites: Complement Ther Med. 2004 Jun-Sep;12(2-3):136-4015561524
Cites: Pain. 2005 Oct;117(3):377-8716153777
Cites: Pain. 2006 Apr;121(3):181-9416495014
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Aug;137(8):1089-98; quiz 1168-916873324
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2010 Summer;24(3):237-5420664825
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Jul;141(7):889-9920592411
Cites: J Oral Rehabil. 2010 May;37(6):430-5120438615
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2010 Winter;24(1):63-7820213032
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2003 Fall;17(4):301-1014737874
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
Cites: J Orofac Pain. 2007 Fall;21(4):318-2818018993
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2007 Feb;138(2):231-717272380
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Aug;137(8):1099-107; quiz 116916873325
Cites: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010 Mar;87(3):351-520010554
PubMed ID
23283934 View in PubMed
Less detail

General practitioners' use of caries-preventive agents in adult patients versus pediatric patients: findings from the dental practice-based research network.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature143171
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Jun;141(6):679-87
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2010
Author
Joseph L Riley
Valeria V Gordan
D Brad Rindal
Jeffrey L Fellows
O Dale Williams
Lloyd K Ritchie
Gregg H Gilbert
Author Affiliation
Department of Community Dentistry and Behavioral Science, College of Dentistry, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Jun;141(6):679-87
Date
Jun-2010
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adolescent
Adult
Age Factors
Aged
Anti-Infective Agents, Local - therapeutic use
Cariostatic Agents - therapeutic use
Chewing Gum
Child
Child, Preschool
Chlorhexidine - therapeutic use
Dentist's Practice Patterns - statistics & numerical data
Female
Fluorides - therapeutic use
Fluorides, Topical - therapeutic use
General Practice, Dental - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Infant
Insurance, Dental - statistics & numerical data
Male
Middle Aged
Mouthwashes - therapeutic use
Pit and Fissure Sealants - therapeutic use
Risk assessment
Scandinavia
Self Care
Sweetening Agents - therapeutic use
United States
Xylitol - therapeutic use
Young Adult
Abstract
In this study, the authors tested the frequency of dentists' recommendations for and use of caries-preventive agents for children as compared with adults.
The authors surveyed 467 general dentists in the Dental Practice-Based Research Network who practice within the United States and treat both pediatric and adult patients. They asked dentists to identify the percentage of their patients for whom they had administered or recommended dental sealants, in-office and at-home fluoride, chlorhexidine rinse and xylitol gum.
Dentists were less likely to provide adult patients than pediatric patients with in-office caries-preventive agents. However, the rate at which they recommended at-home preventive regimens for the two groups of patients was similar. Dentists with a conservative approach to caries treatment were the most likely to use and recommend the use of caries-preventive agents at similar rates in adults as in children. In addition, dentists in practices with a greater number of patients who had dental insurance were significantly more likely to provide in-office fluoride or sealants to adult patients than to pediatric patients.
General dentists use in-office caries-preventive agents more commonly with their pediatric patients than with their adult patients.
General dentists should consider providing additional in-office caries-preventive agents for their adult patients who are at increased risk of experiencing dental caries.
Notes
Cites: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(3):CD00183015266455
Cites: MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001 Aug 17;50(RR-14):1-4211521913
Cites: ASDC J Dent Child. 1995 Jul-Aug;62(4):250-57593882
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 1996 Winter;56(1):12-218667312
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1996 Mar;127(3):335-438819780
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1997 Mar;128(3):337-459066218
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 1998 Jun;56(3):179-869688230
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2005 Feb;136(2):171-8; quiz 23015782520
Cites: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2005 Jun;33(3):181-9515853841
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2005 May;69(5):538-5415897335
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Aug;137(8):1151-916873333
Cites: J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2006 Mar;6(1):91-10017138407
Cites: Eur J Oral Sci. 2006 Dec;114(6):449-5517184224
Cites: J Dent Res. 2007 May;86(5):410-517452559
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2007 May;71(5):572-817493965
Cites: Quintessence Int. 2000 Mar;31(3):165-7911203922
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2004 Jun;62(3):170-615370638
Cites: J Dent. 2007 Jul;35(7):570-717478027
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 2007 Summer;67(3):140-717899898
Cites: J Calif Dent Assoc. 2007 Nov;35(11):799-80518080486
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jan;139(1):74-8118167389
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Mar;139(3):257-6818310730
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Mar;139(3):271-8; quiz 357-818310731
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 2004 Winter;64(1):20-515078057
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2003 Dec;61(6):321-3014960003
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2003 Apr;67(4):448-5812749574
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2003 Feb;61(1):29-3312635778
Cites: Pediatr Dent. 2002 Sep-Oct;24(5):393-41412412954
Cites: Pediatr Dent. 2001 Sep-Oct;23(5):401-611699162
Cites: J Dent Educ. 2001 Oct;65(10):972-811699999
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2001 Oct;132(10):1442-51; quiz 146111680361
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2000 Jul;131(7):961-810916334
PubMed ID
20516100 View in PubMed
Less detail

Institutional review board and regulatory solutions in the dental PBRN.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature149018
Source
J Public Health Dent. 2010;70(1):19-27
Publication Type
Article
Date
2010
Author
Gregg H Gilbert
Vibeke Qvist
Sheila D Moore
D Brad Rindal
Jeffrey L Fellows
Valeria V Gordan
O Dale Williams
Author Affiliation
Department of Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Alabama at Birmingham, AL 35294-0007, USA. ghg@uab.edu
Source
J Public Health Dent. 2010;70(1):19-27
Date
2010
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Clinical Trials as Topic - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence
Computer Communication Networks
Dental Research - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence - organization & administration
Ethics Committees, Research - organization & administration
Financing, Government - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence
Government Regulation
Humans
Informed consent
Research Subjects - legislation & jurisprudence
Scandinavia
United States
Abstract
Effectively addressing regulatory and human participant protection issues with Institutional Review Boards (IRBs, or ethics committees) and grants administration entities is an important component of conducting research in large collaborative networks. A dental practice-based research network called "DPBRN" (http://www.DPBRN.org) comprises dentists in two health maintenance organizations, several universities, seven US states, and three Scandinavian countries. Our objectives are to describe: a) the various human participants and regulatory requirements and solutions for each of DPBRN's five regions; b) their impact on study protocols and implementation; and c) lessons learned from this process.
Following numerous discussions with IRB and grants administrative personnel for each region, some practitioner-investigators are attached to their respective IRBs and contracting entities via sub-contracts between their organizations and the network's administrative site. Others are attached via Individual Investigator Agreements and contractually obligated via Memoranda of Agreement.
IRBs approve general operations under one approval, but specific research projects via separate approvals. Various formal IRB and grants administrative agreements have been arranged to customize research to the network context. In some instances, this occurred after feedback from patients and practitioners that lengthy written consent forms impeded research and raised suspicion, instead of decreasing it.
Instead of viewing IRBs and institutional administrators as potentially adversarial, customized solutions can be identified by engaging them in collegial discussions that identify common ground within regulatory bounds. Although time-intensive and complex, these solutions improve acceptability of practice-based research to patients, practitioners, and university researchers.
Notes
Cites: J Investig Med. 2003 Mar;51(2):64-7112643510
Cites: JAMA. 2003 Jul 16;290(3):360-612865377
Cites: Med Care. 2004 Apr;42(4 Suppl):III45-915026664
Cites: Health Serv Res. 2005 Feb;40(1):291-30715663714
Cites: J Nutr. 2005 Apr;135(4):921-415795462
Cites: Ann Fam Med. 2005 May-Jun;3 Suppl 1:S30-715928216
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2005 Jun;136(6):728-3716022037
Cites: Am J Surg. 2005 Nov;190(5):805-916226962
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;19(1):1-1016491999
Cites: Ann Epidemiol. 2006 Apr;16(4):275-816005245
Cites: JAMA. 2007 Jan 24;297(4):403-617244837
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;20(2):181-717341755
Cites: Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Apr;14(4):377-8017312334
Cites: Health Serv Res. 2007 Aug;42(4):1773-8217610447
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jan;139(1):74-8118167389
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
PubMed ID
19694937 View in PubMed
Less detail

Lessons learned during the conduct of clinical studies in the dental PBRN.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature135633
Source
J Dent Educ. 2011 Apr;75(4):453-65
Publication Type
Article
Date
Apr-2011
Author
Gregg H Gilbert
Joshua S Richman
Valeria V Gordan
D Brad Rindal
Jeffrey L Fellows
Paul L Benjamin
Martha Wallace-Dawson
O Dale Williams
Author Affiliation
Birmingham, SDB Room 109, 1530 3 Avenue South, Birmingham, AL 35294-0007, USA. ghg@uab.edu
Source
J Dent Educ. 2011 Apr;75(4):453-65
Date
Apr-2011
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Community-Based Participatory Research
Data Collection
Dental Research - methods
Dentist's Practice Patterns
Humans
Patient Participation
Research Design
Research Personnel
Scandinavia
United States
Abstract
Effectively addressing challenges of conducting research in nonacademic settings is crucial to its success. A dental practice-based research network called The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) is comprised of practitioner- investigators in two health maintenance organizations, several universities, many U.S. states, and three Scandinavian countries. Our objective in this article is to describe lessons learned from conducting studies in this research context; the studies are conducted by clinicians in community settings who may be doing their first research study. To date, twenty-one studies have been completed or are in implementation. These include a broad range of topic areas, enrollment sizes, and study designs. A total of 1,126 practitioner-investigators have participated in at least one study. After excluding one study because it involved electronic records queries only, these studies included more than 70,000 patient/participant units. Because the DPBRN is committed to being both practitioner- and patient-driven, all studies must be approved by its Executive Committee and a formal study section of academic clinical scientists. As a result of interacting with a diverse range of institutional and regulatory entities, funding agencies, practitioners, clinic staff, patients, academic scientists, and geographic areas, twenty-three key lessons have been learned. Patients' acceptance of these studies has been very high, judging from high participation rates and their completion of data forms. Early studies substantially informed later studies with regard to study design, practicality, forms design, informed consent process, and training and monitoring methods. Although time-intensive and complex, these solutions improved acceptability of practice-based research to patients, practitioners, and university researchers.
Notes
Cites: Acad Med. 2010 Mar;85(3):476-8320182121
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Apr;141(4):441-820354094
Cites: Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2010 Mar;235(3):290-920404046
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 2010 Winter;70(1):19-2719694937
Cites: Child Care Health Dev. 2010 May;36(3):385-9120507330
Cites: Gen Dent. 2010 Nov-Dec;58(6):520-821062721
Cites: J Investig Med. 2003 Mar;51(2):64-7112643510
Cites: Med Care. 2004 Apr;42(4 Suppl):III45-915026664
Cites: Ann Fam Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;4(1):8-1416449391
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;19(1):1-1016491999
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;19(1):75-8416492009
Cites: JAMA. 2007 Jan 24;297(4):403-617244837
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;20(2):105-1417341746
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;20(2):181-717341755
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jan;139(1):74-8118167389
Cites: J Med Internet Res. 2008;10(5):e3818984559
Cites: Circulation. 2009 May 19;119(19):2633-4219451365
Cites: J Am Board Fam Med. 2009 Jul-Aug;22(4):428-3519587258
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
Cites: BMC Oral Health. 2009;9:2619832991
PubMed ID
21460266 View in PubMed
Less detail

Practitioner, patient and carious lesion characteristics associated with type of restorative material: findings from The Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature134040
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Jun;142(6):622-32
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2011
Author
Sonia K Makhija
Valeria V Gordan
Gregg H Gilbert
Mark S Litaker
D Brad Rindal
Daniel J Pihlstrom
Vibeke Qvist
Author Affiliation
Department of General Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1530 3rd Ave. South, SDB 111, Birmingham, AL 35294-0007, USA. smakhija@uab.edu
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Jun;142(6):622-32
Date
Jun-2011
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
African Americans - statistics & numerical data
Age Factors
Bicuspid - pathology
Community-Based Participatory Research
Composite Resins
Cross-Sectional Studies
Dental Amalgam
Dental Caries - classification - therapy
Dental Enamel - pathology
Dental Materials - chemistry
Dental Restoration, Permanent - classification - statistics & numerical data
Dentin - pathology
Dentist's Practice Patterns - statistics & numerical data
European Continental Ancestry Group - statistics & numerical data
Female
Hispanic Americans
Humans
Insurance, Dental - statistics & numerical data
Male
Molar - pathology
Professional Practice - statistics & numerical data
Scandinavia
Sex Factors
United States
Workload
Abstract
The authors conducted a study to identify factors associated with the materials that dentists in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) use when placing the first restoration on permanent posterior tooth surfaces.
A total of 182 DPBRN practitioner-investigators provided data regarding 5,599 posterior teeth with caries. Practitioner-investigators completed an enrollment questionnaire that included the dentist's age, sex, practice workload, practice type and number of years since graduation. When patients who had provided informed consent to participate in the investigation sought treatment for a previously unrestored carious surface, the practitioner-investigator recorded patient and tooth characteristics.
Practitioner-investigators used amalgam more often than they used direct resin-based composite (RBC) for posterior carious lesions. Practitioner and practice characteristics (years since graduation and type of practice); patient characteristics (sex, race, age and dental insurance status); and lesion characteristics (tooth location and surface, preoperative and postoperative lesion depth) were associated with the type of restorative material used.
Several practitioner and practice, patient and lesion characteristics were associated significantly with use of amalgam and RBC: geographical region, years since dentist's graduation, patient's dental insurance status, tooth location and surface, and preoperative and postoperative lesion depth.
Despite advances in esthetic dentistry, U.S. dentists still are placing amalgam on posterior teeth with carious lesions. Amalgam was used more often than RBC in older patients, who may have had deeper carious lesions.
Notes
Cites: Qual Health Care. 1999 Sep;8(3):202-710847878
Cites: J Esthet Dent. 1999;11(3):135-4210825870
Cites: Int Dent J. 2000 Feb;50(1):1-1210945174
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2001 Feb;59(1):21-711318041
Cites: Community Dent Health. 2000 Jun;17(2):97-10111349994
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2001 Apr;59(2):57-6211370750
Cites: Dent Mater. 1997 Jul;13(4):258-6911696906
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2002 Aug;133(8):104612198982
Cites: Br Dent J. 2003 Jun 14;194(11):613-8; discussion 60912819697
Cites: J Dent. 2003 Aug;31(6):395-40512878022
Cites: Int Dent J. 1990 Feb;40(1):11-72407659
Cites: Dent Mater. 1990 Jul;6(3):189-942086293
Cites: Quintessence Int. 1991 Nov;22(11):857-641812507
Cites: Adv Dent Res. 1992 Sep;6:44-91292462
Cites: J Dent. 1994 Feb;22(1):33-438157810
Cites: Aust Dent J. 1996 Aug;41(4):256-98870281
Cites: Oper Dent. 1994 Jul-Aug;19(4):127-329028231
Cites: Br Dent J. 1997 Jul 12;183(1):11-49254957
Cites: J Dent Res. 1997 Nov;76(11):1787-989372797
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 Sep;129(9):1229-389766104
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 Dec;129(12):1757-99854929
Cites: J Esthet Dent. 1998;10(6):290-510321198
Cites: Oral Health Prev Dent. 2005;3(1):53-6015921338
Cites: Eur J Oral Sci. 2006 Feb;114(1):15-2116460336
Cites: JAMA. 2006 Apr 19;295(15):1775-8316622139
Cites: JAMA. 2006 Apr 19;295(15):1784-9216622140
Cites: Dent Mater. 2007 Jan;23(1):2-816417916
Cites: Quintessence Int. 2007 Apr;38(4):e189-9417530050
Cites: Public Health Rep. 2007 Sep-Oct;122(5):657-6317877313
Cites: Oper Dent. 2007 Sep-Oct;32(5):524-817910231
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jan;139(1):74-8118167389
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2009;67(1):44-919039686
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 2009;67(2):74-919085213
Cites: J Dent. 2009 Sep;37(9):673-819477572
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
Cites: BMC Oral Health. 2009;9:2619832991
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Apr;141(4):441-820354094
Cites: Oper Dent. 2010 Jul-Aug;35(4):389-9620672722
Cites: Acta Odontol Scand. 1999 Oct;57(5):257-6210614902
Comment In: J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Nov;142(11):1232-3; author reply 1233-422041404
PubMed ID
21628683 View in PubMed
Less detail

The prevalence of questionable occlusal caries: findings from the Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature118479
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2012 Dec;143(12):1343-50
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-2012
Author
Sonia K Makhija
Gregg H Gilbert
Ellen Funkhouser
James D Bader
Valeria V Gordan
D Brad Rindal
Michael Bauer
Daniel J Pihlstrom
Vibeke Qvist
Author Affiliation
Department of Clinical and Community Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Dentistry, 1720 2nd Ave. South, SDB 111, Birmingham, AL 35294-0007, USA. smakhija@uab.edu
Source
J Am Dent Assoc. 2012 Dec;143(12):1343-50
Date
Dec-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Bicuspid - pathology
Community-Based Participatory Research - statistics & numerical data
Cross-Sectional Studies
Denmark - epidemiology
Dental Caries - epidemiology
European Continental Ancestry Group - statistics & numerical data
Female
Humans
Male
Molar - pathology
Prevalence
Tooth Crown - pathology
United States - epidemiology
Abstract
Questionable occlusal caries (QOC) can be defined as clinically suspected caries with no cavitation or radiographic evidence of occlusal caries. To the authors' knowledge, no one has quantified the prevalence of QOC, so this quantification was the authors' objective in conducting this study
A total of 82 dentist and hygienist practitioner-investigators (P-Is) from the United States and Denmark in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) participated. When patients seeking treatment had at least one unrestored occlusal surface, P-Is quantified their number of unrestored occlusal surfaces and instances of QOC, if applicable. P-Is also recorded information about characteristics of patients who had QOC and had provided informed consent. The authors adjusted for patient clustering within practices.
Overall, 6,910 patients had at least one unrestored occlusal surface, with a total of 50,445 unrestored surfaces. Thirty-four percent of all patients and 11 percent of unrestored occlusal tooth surfaces among all patients had QOC. Patient- and surface-level QOC prevalences varied significantly according to DPBRN region (P
Notes
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2000 Feb;131(2):223-3110680391
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2000 Jun;131 Suppl:13S-19S10860340
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2001 Jun;132(6):762-911433855
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2002 Dec;133(12):1643-5112512664
Cites: Gen Dent. 2002 Jul-Aug;50(4):346-5012640851
Cites: Caries Res. 2004 May-Jun;38(3):294-30415153703
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 1984 Jan;108(1):64-86582117
Cites: Br Dent J. 1988 Apr 9;164(7):209-113163930
Cites: ASDC J Dent Child. 1990 Nov-Dec;57(6):428-322258503
Cites: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1992 Aug;20(4):187-921526101
Cites: Br Dent J. 1993 May 22;174(10):364-708494666
Cites: Caries Res. 1993;27(5):409-168242679
Cites: J Dent. 1993 Dec;21(6):323-318258581
Cites: Caries Res. 1996;30(6):381-88946093
Cites: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997 Feb;25(1):24-359088689
Cites: Ethn Health. 1998 Feb-May;3(1-2):59-709673464
Cites: Quintessence Int. 1999 Mar;30(3):174-810356570
Cites: J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2006 Mar;6(1):91-10017138407
Cites: Community Dent Health. 2007 Mar;24(1):26-3017405467
Cites: J Public Health Dent. 2007 Fall;67(4):224-3318087993
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jan;139(1):74-8118167389
Cites: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2008 Oct;36(5):392-40018924255
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 May-Jun;57(3):270-519819818
Cites: BMC Oral Health. 2009;9:2619832991
Cites: Gen Dent. 2009 Nov-Dec;57(6):654-63; quiz 664-6, 595, 68019906618
Cites: Oper Dent. 2009 Nov-Dec;34(6):664-7319953775
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2010 Feb;141(2):171-8420123876
Cites: J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Jun;142(6):622-3221628683
Cites: Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Apr;16(2):521-921479565
PubMed ID
23204090 View in PubMed
Less detail

15 records – page 1 of 2.