A learning health system (LHS) is a health system in which patients and clinicians work together to choose care on the basis of best evidence and to drive discovery as a natural outgrowth of every clinical encounter to ensure the right care at the right time. An LHS for dentistry is now feasible, as an increased number of oral health care encounters are captured in electronic health records (EHRs).The authors used EHRs data to track periodontal health outcomes at 3 large dental institutions. The 2 outcomes of interest were a new periodontitis case (for patients who had not received a diagnosis of periodontitis previously) and tooth loss due to progression of periodontal disease.The authors assessed a total of 494,272 examinations (new periodontitis outcome: n = 168,442; new tooth loss outcome: n = 325,830), representing a total of 194,984 patients. Dynamic dashboards displaying performance on both measures over time allow users to compare demographic and risk factors for patients. The incidence of new periodontitis and tooth loss was 4.3% and 1.2%, respectively.Periodontal disease, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment are particularly well suited for an LHS model. The results showed the feasibility of automated extraction and interpretation of critical data elements from the EHRs. The 2 outcome measures are being implemented as part of a dental LHS. The authors are using this knowledge to target the main drivers of poorer periodontal outcomes in a specific patient population, and they continue to use clinical health data for the purpose of learning and improvement.Dental institutions of any size can conduct contemporaneous self-evaluation and immediately implement targeted strategies to improve oral health outcomes.
In today's digital era, people are increasingly relying on the Internet-including social media-to access health information and inform their health decisions. This article describes an exploratory initiative to better understand and define the role of dentists in patient education in the context of e-patients and Health 2.0. This initiative consisted of four phases. In Phase I, an interdisciplinary expert advisory committee was assembled for a roundtable discussion about patients' health information-seeking behaviors online. In Phase II, a pilot case study was conducted, with methods and analysis informed by Phase I recommendations. Phase III consisted of a debriefing conference to outline future areas of research on modernizing health communication strategies. In Phase IV, the findings and working theories were presented to 75 dental students, who then took a survey regarding their perspectives with the objective of guiding potential curriculum design for predoctoral courses. The results of the survey showed that the validity of online content was often secondary to the strength of the network sharing it and that advocacy online could be more effective if it allowed for emotional connections with peers rather than preserving accuracy of the information. Students expressed high interest in learning how to harness modern health communications in their clinical care since the role of the dentist is evolving from giving information to giving personalized guidance against the backdrop of an often contradictory modern information environment. The authors recommend that the dental profession develop patient-centered health communication training for predoctoral students and professional development and continuing education for practicing professionals.
Variation in periodontal terminology can affect the diagnosis and treatment plan as assessed by practicing general dentists in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network. General dentists participating in the PEARL Network are highly screened, credentialed, and qualified and may not be representative of the general population of dentists.Ten randomized case presentations ranging from periodontal health to gingivitis, to mild, moderate, and severe periodontitis were randomly presented to respondents. Descriptive comparisons were made between these diagnosis groups in terms of the treatment recommendations following diagnosis.PEARL practitioners assessing periodontal clinical scenarios were found to either over- or under-diagnose the case presentations, which affected treatment planning, while the remaining responses concurred with respect to the diagnosis. The predominant diagnosis was compared with that assigned by two practicing periodontists. There was variation in treatment based on the diagnosis for gingivitis and the lesser forms of periodontitis.Data suggests that a lack of clarity of periodontal terminology affects both diagnosis and treatment planning, and terminology may be improved by having diagnosis codes, which could be used to assess treatment outcomes.This article provides data to support best practice for the use of diagnosis coding and integration of dentistry with medicine using ICD-10 terminology.
BACKGROUND Post-operative dental pain is pervasive and can significantly affect a patient's quality of life. Adopting a patient-centric approach to pain management involves having contemporaneous information about the patient's experience of pain and using it to personalize care. OBJECTIVE In this study, we evaluated the use of an mHealth platform to collect pain-related patient reported outcomes (PROs) over 7-days after pain-inducing dental procedures, relayed the information to the dentist, and determined its impact on the patient pain experience. METHODS The study employed a cluster-randomized experimental study design with: (1) an intervention arm where patients were prompted to complete a series of questions relating to their pain experience after automated text notifications on their smartphone on Days 1, 3, 5 and 7, with the resulting information fed back to dentists; and (2) a control arm where patients received usual care. Providers were randomized and patients subsequently assumed the enrollment status of their providers. Providers or their staff identified eligible patients and invited them to participate in the study. Provider interviews and surveys were conducted to evaluate acceptance of the mHealth platform. RESULTS A total of 42 providers and 1,525 patients participated. For the primary outcome (pain intensity on a 1 to 10 (most painful) scale), intervention group patients reported an average pain intensity of 4.8 (SD = 2.6), while those in the control group reported an average pain level of 4.7 (SD = 2.8). These differences were not significant. There were also no significant differences in secondary outcomes including pain interference with activity or sleep, patient satisfaction with pain management, or opioid prescribing. Patient surveys revealed reluctance to use the app was mostly due to technological challenges, data privacy concerns, and preference for phone calls over texting. Providers had high satisfaction with the app and suggested integrating additional features, such as an in-system camera for patients to upload pictures and videos of the procedural site as well as integration with the Electronic Health Record system. CONCLUSIONS While the mHealth platform did not have a significant impact on acute postoperative pain experience, patients and providers indicated improvement in patient-provider communication, patient-provider relationship, post-operative complication management, and ability to manage pain medication prescribing. Expanded collaboration between mHealth developers and frontline healthcare providers can facilitate the applicability of these platforms, further help improve its integration with normal clinic workflow, and assist in moving towards a more patient-centric approach to pain management. CLINICALTRIAL Clinical Trial registration: NCT03881891
Abstract Background Longitudinal patient level data available in the electronic health record (EHR) allows for the development, implementation, and validations of dental quality measures (eMeasures). Objective We report the feasibility and validity of implementing two eMeasures. The eMeasures determined the proportion of patients receiving a caries risk assessment (eCRA) and corresponding appropriate risk-based preventative treatments for patients at elevated risk of caries (appropriateness of care [eAoC]) in two academic institutions and one accountable care organization, in the 2019 reporting year. Methods Both eMeasures define the numerator and denominator beginning at the patient level, populations' specifications, and validated the automated queries. For eCRA, patients who completed a comprehensive or periodic oral evaluation formed the denominator, and patients of any age who received a CRA formed the numerator. The eAoC evaluated the proportion of patients at elevated caries risk who received the corresponding appropriate risk-based preventative treatments. Results EHR automated queries identified in three sites 269,536 patients who met the inclusion criteria for receiving a CRA. The overall proportion of patients who received a CRA was 94.4% (eCRA). In eAoC, patients at elevated caries risk levels (moderate, high, or extreme) received fluoride preventive treatment ranging from 56 to 93.8%. For patients at high and extreme risk, antimicrobials were prescribed more frequently site 3 (80.6%) than sites 2 (16.7%) and 1 (2.9%). Conclusion Patient-level data available in the EHRs can be used to implement process-of-care dental eCRA and AoC, eAoC measures identify gaps in clinical practice. EHR-based measures can be useful in improving delivery of evidence-based preventative treatments to reduce risk, prevent tooth decay, and improve oral health.
Abstract Background Patient-reported outcome measures provide an essential perspective on the quality of health care provided. However, how data are collected, how providers value and make sense of the data, and, ultimately, use the data to create meaningful impact all influence the success of using patient-reported outcomes. Objectives The primary objective is to assess post-operative pain experiences by dental procedure type through 21 days post-procedure as reported by patients following dental procedures and assess patients’ satisfaction with pain management following dental surgical procedures. Secondary objectives are to: 1) assess post-operative pain management strategies 1 week following dental surgical procedures, as recommended by practitioners and reported by patients, and 2) evaluate practitioner and patient acceptance of the FollowApp.Care post visit patient monitoring technology (FollowApp.Care). We will evaluate FollowApp.Care usage, perceived usefulness, ease of use, and impact on clinical workload. Design and methods We describe the protocol for an observational study involving the use of the FollowApp.Care platform, an innovative mobile application that collects dental patients’ assessments of their post-operative symptoms (e.g., pain). The study will be conducted in collaboration with the National Dental Practice-based Research Network, a collective Network of dental practices that include private and group practices, public health clinics, community health centers and Federal Qualified Health Centers, academic institutional settings, and special patient populations. We will recruit a minimum of 150 and up to 215 dental providers and up to 3147 patients who will receive push notifications through text messages FollowApp.Care on their mobile phones at designated time intervals following dental procedures. This innovative approach of implementing an existing and tested mobile health system technology into the real-world dental office setting will actively track pain and other complications following dental procedures. Through patients’ use of their mobile phones, we expect to promptly and precisely identify specific pain levels and other issues after surgical dental procedures. The study’s primary outcome will be the patients’ reported pain experiences. Secondary outcomes include pain management strategies and medications implemented by the patient and provider and perceptions of usefulness and ease of use by patients and providers.
The academic program for the Harvard School of Dental Medicine's Advanced Graduate Program in Oral Implantology is based on scientific evidence applied to educational quality, translational research, patient care, and service. The objective of the program is to enable highly motivated individuals with proven scholarship and excellence in patient care to achieve academic leadership in the clinical and scientific fields of implant dentistry and tissue regeneration. A detailed curriculum describing the academic program, as well as a business plan (which included a management plan describing the organizational structure, financial implications, and market forces) and implementation and communication plans, were developed before moving forward. With careful academic and business planning, the result was a vibrant implant program, in which all placements and restorations of implants are coordinated with regard to practice management. The program is integrated into the existing clinical care model and has been financially self‐sustaining from its inception. Six students have participated in the last two years. On average, each student performed seventy‐nine procedures on twenty‐nine patients, generating over $46,000 in production. The curriculum includes didactics, hands‐on clinical learning, and research activities. Research is a critical component as well. The results demonstrate that the time taken to develop a detailed curriculum and business plan for a new academic program, which anticipated and resolved potential barriers to success, was instrumental in the successful implementation of an oral implantology residency program.
The objective of this study is to propose empirically and conceptually supported interventions that might increase the capability and opportunity to provide of oral hygiene care and oral cancer screening in long-term nursing care facilities.Improving the oral health in the older adult population is a priority of the Healthy People 2020 initiative. Poor oral health disproportionably affects older populations, which indicates lower participation in regular oral health care (OHC) that includes screening and early detection of oral cancer.A rigorous recruitment protocol yielded a purposive sample of nursing home Administrators and Directors of Nursing who participated in nine discrete focus groups (n = 34) in several regions of Massachusetts. Interview data were integrated with a conceptual framework of the Health Belief Model and the "capability," "opportunity," "motivation" and "behavior" of the COM-B system to identify potential interventions to increase oral health and oral cancer screening. We used NVivo to identify conceptual themes related to potential intervention targets.Participants identified several impediments to oral hygiene and cancer screening in the context of the conceptual model. High barriers, low opportunities and low motivation were themes identified as potential targets for intervention.Our findings suggest that the intervention likely to increase OHC and consequently oral cancer screening include: training certified nurses' aides using dental students and volunteers; educating family members about OHC and oral cancer screening, and increasing oral cancer awareness.
