Diagnostic approach used by US general dental practitioners following discovery of oral lesions suspicious for malignancy/premalignancy: findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

OBJECTIVE: Oral cancer examinations seek to clinically identify early oral cancers and discover premalignancies prior to their progression to invasive cancer. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between April and August 2017 to explore and quantify the diagnostic approach used by United States (US) general dental practitioners following discovery of an oral lesion suspicious for malignancy/premalignancy. US licensed general dental practitioners who were clinically active members of the US National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible to participate. Data for analysis were obtained via two questionnaires. RESULTS: The majority of participants were males, practiced full-time, had a suburban primary practice, were born during the 1950s, and graduated dental school in the 1980s or 2000s. After identifying an oral lesion suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy, the next action of most general dental practitioner respondents (65.4%) was to refer the patient for consultation/biopsy. Most general dental practitioners (87.2%) referred to an oral and maxillofacial surgeon; 22% of general dental practitioners reported personally biopsying suspicious lesions. There was a relatively weak association between completing an Advanced Education in General Dentistry or General Practice Residency and subsequently personally performing biopsies on patients with oral lesions suspicious for malignancy/premalignancy (OR 1.33, P = .06). Most written referrals took place electronically and often included information, including lesion location (87.0%), lesion sign/symptoms (85.3%), lesion history (83.9%), radiographs (59.3%), medical history (50.6%), dental history (48.8%), and photographs (42.4%). When a referral biopsy was performed, referring clinicians were most frequently informed of the findings via a written report (96.7%, when positive for malignancy/premalignancy, and 95.4% when negative). CONCLUSION: A snapshot is presented of current actions taken by US general dental practitioners following the discovery of oral abnormalities suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy.

Cues used by dentists in the early detection of oral cancer and oral potentially malignant lesions: findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the influence of clinical cues on risk assessment of cancer-associated mucosal abnormalities. STUDY DESIGN: We differentiated lesions with a low risk from those with a high risk for premalignancy or malignancy by using 4 cues: (1) color, (2) location, (3) induration, and (4) pain on exploration. Combinations of color and location were presented through 8 photographs, with induration and pain status variably presented in the standardized history and physical findings. This created 16 clinical scenarios (vignettes) that were permutations of the 4 cues. Three questions assessed the extent to which each cue was used in obtaining a clinical impression as to whether a lesion was benign, premalignant, or malignant. RESULTS: Completed vignette questionnaires were obtained from 130 of 228 invited dentists, (two-thirds males; 79% white; mean age 52 years; average weekly hours of practice 33 hours). Only 40% of the responding dentists had statistically significant decision policies to assign a clinical diagnosis of a lesion as benign, premalignant, or malignant. Lesion location and color were the 2 dominant cues. As a cue, induration was used as a cue by more of the respondents in determining a clinical diagnosis of malignancy, and pain was infrequently used as a cue. CONCLUSIONS: Many dentists do not to have a decision strategy for the clinical diagnosis and risk stratification of oral potentially malignant lesions.

Oral cancer examinations and lesion discovery as reported by U.S. general dentists: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

General dentists (GDs) have the opportunity to examine their patients for oral premalignancy/malignancy. We estimated the annualized per dentist number of oral lesions suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy discovered by United States (U.S.) general dentists and the annualized per dentist number of histologically-confirmed cancers subsequently diagnosed. Eligible participants were licensed, clinically-active U.S. GDs who were members of the U.S. National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. An a priori sample size of 900 was determined; 2000 GDs were invited to participate; 1,073 completed the study. Self-reported, cross-sectional data were obtained via an online questionnaire during 4/12/2017-8/31/2017 and analyzed. The reported numbers of suspicious oral lesions and histologically-confirmed oral cancer cases diagnosed over the previous six months were quantified. Potential outcome predictors were evaluated as covariates in multivariable analyses. Crude and adjusted statistics were produced by regressing each outcome on each independent variable while assuming a Poisson distribution, log link and utilizing robust standard errors. Eighty-seven percent of dentists reported discovering 1+ lesion suspicious for oral premalignancy/malignancy during the preceding six months. The mean number of suspicious lesions/dentist/year was 9.5; adjusted mean: 9.6. Fifteen percent of participants reported discovering 1+ lesion confirmed as cancer during the same period, 213 confirmed cancer cases/6 months or 426/year. Crude and adjusted mean numbers of histologically-confirmed oral cancers were both 0.4 cancers/dentist/year. Our findings suggest that many U.S. general dentists are actively identifying oral lesions suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy, thereby aiding in the discovery of oral malignancies and representing an important component in the frontline against cancer.

The Head and Neck Cancer Patient Concern Inventory© : Patient Concerns' Prevalence, Dental Concerns' Impact, and Relationships of Concerns with Quality of Life Measures.

PURPOSE: The Patient Concern Inventory© (PCI) is a clinical tool of self-reported patient concerns to be used by the clinician to structure the patient-oncologist visit. It was developed in the United Kingdom to address the issues of quality of life (QOL) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. The purpose of the study reported here was to determine the prevalence of PCI© items, the associations between PCI© items and QOL, and to explore the importance of oral/dental issues in the patient's well-being. METHODS: The PCI© and the University of Washington (UW-QOLv4) instruments were self-administered by an HNC population in a cross-sectional study. Following an a priori sample size estimate, consecutive HNC patients attending at the University of Florida's Oral Medicine and the ENT Clinics had the study described, eligibility assessed, and if eligible, were invited to participate in the study. Participants completed the PCI© and UW-QOL. PCI© issues prevalence was determined, and for those with a ≥10% prevalence: 1) Fisher's exact test was used to test for statistical differences between treatments, and 2) multivariable regression was used to test each of the prevalent PCI© issues across four QOL measures, health in the last 7 days, overall QOL in the last 7 days, and the physical and social domain scores. RESULTS: Twenty of 45 PCI© issues had a prevalence ≥10%. Of the 15 prevalent items statistically associated with a QOL measure, four issues are the clinical responsibility of the dental profession: 1) chewing/eating, 2) dental health/teeth, 3) mouth opening, and 4) salivation. An additional four (eight total, 50%) are of clinical concern for dental clinicians: 5) pain in head/neck, 6) swallowing, 7) speech/voice/being understood, and 8) taste. CONCLUSIONS: Dental concerns represent almost half of all PCI© concerns observed in 10% or more of the sample patients. Prosthodontists should support our maxillofacial prosthodontics specialists in joining other oral oncologists and advocate for comprehensive, integrated dental support for HNC patients by assuring dental involvement/inclusion with the multidisciplinary oncology team and a research agenda to established best patient-centered outcomes.

Increasing opportunistic oral cancer screening examinations: findings from focus groups with general dentists in Puerto Rico.

This study aims to identify educational and training modalities that dentists in Puerto Rico (PR) believe will increase the quality and quantity of opportunistic oral cancer screening examinations (OCS) in dental offices on the island. The study was conducted in three phases: a systematic search of relevant literature, an expert review and consensus panel, and focus groups (FG) involving PR general dentists. To increase OCS by dentists in PR, the FG participants proposed a small group, hands-on OCS training, an integrated oral cancer course, and readily available videos, photographs, and computer simulations to further demonstrate OCS performance and facilitate differential diagnosis. OCS training requirements for licensure and re-licensure, improving OCS dentist-patient communication skills, and establishment of an oral lesion referral center were also viewed favorably. In conclusion, general dentists in our FGs believed the quality and quantity of OCS in Puerto Rico can be increased through the application of specific continuing education and training modalities.

A preliminary study on the relationships between global health/quality of life and specific head and neck cancer quality of life domains in Puerto Rico.

PURPOSE: Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important treatment outcome for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. By ascertaining the most important HNC HRQOL issues, research and practice can be directed toward enhancing patient QOL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 46 ENT clinic HNC patients in Puerto Rico (PR) was completed. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 (general QOL), and the QLQ-H&N35 (HNC QOL) instruments were administered. Correlations and multivariable regressions were separately conducted for QLQ-H&N35 variables on the three QLQ-C30 outcome variables: overall health, overall QOL, and the global health/QOL domain. RESULTS: Correlation findings included statistically significant negative correlations between the three QLQ-C30 outcome variables and the QLQ-H&N35 variables pain, swallowing, social eating, social contact, and sexuality. Multivariable linear regression identified statistically significant inverse indicators of the outcomes: (1) "lessening of sexuality" with "overall health" (p= 0.02), (2) "problem with social eating" (p= 0.023), "taking pain killers" (p= 0.025), and "problem with social contact" (p= 0.035) with "overall QOL," and (3) "problems with social eating" (p < 0.009) and "taking pain killers" (p= 0.016) with the "global health/QOL" domain. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that problems with pain, social eating, social interactions, and loss of sexuality are critical indicators of degraded HRQOL in HNC patients living in Puerto Rico. Our results add to the overall knowledge base regarding QOL among HNC patients. The promise of improved QOL for the HNC patient is attainable through additional research in conjunction with advances in clinical treatments and patient management protocols.