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.

Provision of Specific Dental Procedures By General Dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network: Questionnaire Findings.

BACKGROUND: Objectives were to: (1) determine whether and how often general dentists (GDs) provide specific dental procedures; and (2) test the hypothesis that provision is associated with key dentist, practice, and patient characteristics. METHODS: GDs (n = 2,367) in the United States National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed an Enrollment Questionnaire that included: (1) dentist; (2) practice; and (3) patient characteristics, and how commonly they provide each of 10 dental procedures. We determined how commonly procedures were provided and tested the hypothesis that provision was substantively related to the 3 sets of characteristics. RESULTS: Two procedure categories were classified as "uncommon" (orthodontics, periodontal surgery), 3 were "common" (molar endodontics; implants; non-surgical periodontics), and 5 were "very common" (restorative; esthetic procedures; extractions; removable prosthetics; non-molar endodontics). Dentist, practice, and patient characteristics were substantively related to procedure provision; several characteristics seemed to have pervasive effects, such as dentist gender, training after dental school, full-time/part- time status, private practice vs. institutional practice, presence of a specialist in the same practice, and insurance status of patients. CONCLUSIONS: As a group, GDs provide a comprehensive range of procedures. However, provision by individual dentists is substantively related to certain dentist, practice, and patient characteristics. A large number and broad range of factors seem to influence which procedures GDs provide. This may have implications for how GDs respond to the ever-changing landscape of dental care utilization, patient population demography, scope of practice, delivery models and GDs' evolving role in primary care.

Provision of specific dental procedures by general dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network: questionnaire findings.

BACKGROUND: Objectives were to: (1) determine whether and how often general dentists (GDs) provide specific dental procedures; and (2) test the hypothesis that provision is associated with key dentist, practice, and patient characteristics. METHODS: GDs (n = 2,367) in the United States National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed an Enrollment Questionnaire that included: (1) dentist; (2) practice; and (3) patient characteristics, and how commonly they provide each of 10 dental procedures. We determined how commonly procedures were provided and tested the hypothesis that provision was substantively related to the three sets of characteristics. RESULTS: Two procedure categories were classified as "uncommon" (orthodontics, periodontal surgery), three were "common" (molar endodontics; implants; non-surgical periodontics), and five were "very common" (restorative; esthetic procedures; extractions; removable prosthetics; non-molar endodontics). Dentist, practice, and patient characteristics were substantively related to procedure provision; several characteristics seemed to have pervasive effects, such as dentist gender, training after dental school, full-time/part-time status, private practice vs. institutional practice, presence of a specialist in the same practice, and insurance status of patients. CONCLUSIONS: As a group, GDs provide a comprehensive range of procedures. However, provision by individual dentists is substantively related to certain dentist, practice, and patient characteristics. A large number and broad range of factors seem to influence which procedures GDs provide. This may have implications for how GDs respond to the ever-changing landscape of dental care utilization, patient population demography, scope of practice, delivery models and GDs' evolving role in primary care.

Oral posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder: an uncommon site for an uncommon disorder.

In 2001, the World Health Organization (WHO) published its new classification of tumors of hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues, including an entity named posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD). Because oral PTLD is of clinical relevance to oral health providers, the importance of distinguishing between PTLD and nontransplantation related lymphoma is outlined, and the clinical implications of oral PTLD are discussed.

A decision analysis: the dental management of patients prior to hematology cytotoxic therapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

There is a controversy regarding whether dental treatment before chemotherapy protocols, including hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), is helpful to prevent infections during the consequent immunosuppression. The aim of this study was to develop a decision analysis framework that would test the effect of dental treatment prior to chemotherapy on the survival of the patient. A decision tree was created to compare the clinical outcomes of two treatment alternatives for a base-case patient receiving cytotoxics or undergoing HSCT. The variables used to build the model were "systemic infection", "unmet dental needs", "dental needs". The outcomes evaluate to compare the two strategies was "survival". We performed MEDLINE and PubMed searches of English-language literature according to a list of related terms. The decision analysis model selected dental treatment prior to chemotherapy as the preferred strategy for the base case analysis. The results of this study suggest that dental treatment prior to chemotherapy is the preferred treatment strategy. Using our base case data, 1.8 of every 1000 hemato-oncologic patients or HSCT patients will die compared to the non-treatment prior to chemotherapy strategy.