Gender disparity in speakers of the European Orthodontic Society conferences held between 2015 and 2020: a cross-sectional report.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the representation of female scientists as speakers of blindly selected oral presentations or invited speakers in the latest European Orthodontic Society (EOS) conferences between 2015 and 2020. To examine the association with a number of study- and author-related characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Abstract books and programmes of the EOS conferences held between 2015 and 2020, were electronically searched to identify the gender of all speakers. The following predictor variables were assessed: year, continent of authorship, number of centres, number of authors involved, study design, study topic, and presentation as a WJB Houston Award nominee. RESULTS: A total of 312 oral presentations were recorded with almost even distribution of female/male gender. In the majority of oral presentations, a European-origin speaker affiliation was confirmed (208/312; 66.7%), with a relatively equal representation of women (P = 0.05). Seniority in authorship of oral presentations belonged to male scientists (209/312; 67%). Furthermore, a total of 84 invited speakers were identified, of which only 15 (17.9%) were female, indicating a substantial gender gap. No more than four women were invited to lecture annually, compared to a minimum of 10 male scientists. Overall, a significant difference was recorded for the odds of a female scientist to be invited as a speaker in the EOS conference (range of odds across years: 0.20-0.36), compared to the odds for conducting an oral presentation in the same context and timescale (range of odds across years: 0.75-1.45) (Mantel-Haenszel test for homogeneity, P-value < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Findings were based solely on the annual orthodontic conference of the EOS, without further insights on national conferences, or identification of wide-range timescale effects. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Gender disparity related to invited speakers at the EOS 2015-20 annual conferences was unequivocally confirmed. Nevertheless, gender differences were not identified in oral presentations. Firm efforts to ensure female scientist's voice is equally represented are needed including a move from theory to practice.

The value of adult orthodontics: Do the public's willingness-to-pay values reflect the profession's?

OBJECTIVE: To explore how the public and dental professionals would value an orthodontic service for adults by eliciting their willingness-to-pay (WTP), a standardised health economics technique which quantifies 'strength of preference' in monetary terms. Despite increasing demand, adults in the UK are only eligible for NHS orthodontic treatment if there is severe dental health or complex multidisciplinary need. Orthodontic services are provided to children aged under 18 years who are eligible by their Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN) score. Consequently, many adults who may have a need for treatment as determined by IOTN are unable to access this service. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: General dental practices in North East England and national specialists approached through the British Orthodontic Society (BOS). PARTICIPANTS: Public participants were recruited from general dental practices. Dentists were recruited from local dental lists and members of the BOS. METHODS: Participants were asked if they would be willing to pay to see an orthodontic service extended to all adults in England with a qualifying IOTN. Clinical photographs of three malocclusions were presented and maximum WTP in additional tax per household per year was elicited using shuffled payment cards. RESULTS: A total of 205 dentists and 206 public participants were recruited. Pairwise tests showed a statistically significant difference in WTP between the public and professionals for all malocclusions, with the public giving higher valuations. In both groups, the Class III scenario elicited a higher WTP than the class I or II malocclusion. However, when all other factors were controlled for using a regression analysis, the group (public or profession) and the other variables did not significantly influence WTP. CONCLUSION: The public and professionals were willing to pay for an adult orthodontic service. Due to this variability and unpredictability the allocation of healthcare resources will remain contentious.

A comparative assessment of information recall and comprehension between conventional leaflets and an animated video in adolescent patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment: A single-center, randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this 2-arm parallel trial was to investigate the recall and comprehension of the information of orthodontic patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment using either the verbal explanation supported with the British Orthodontic Society (BOS) leaflet or 3-dimensional (3D) animated content. METHODS: Patients aged 12-18 years, with no relevant medical history or learning and reading difficulties, who were to undergo orthodontic treatment, were randomized to receive information about fixed orthodontic treatment, using either verbal explanation supported with the BOS leaflet or 3D animated content on the basis of the BOS leaflet. Randomization was performed by block randomization; block size of 4 was used, from which 6 blocks with 6 different sequences (AABB, ABBA, ABAB, BBAA, BAAB, BABA). The blinded author asked patients a series of open-ended questions. The primary outcome measure was the total score of the questions. An independent 2 sample t test was conducted to determine if there was a statistical difference in total questions score between the conventional method (verbal and leaflet) and the 3D animation at the time of consent taking (T0) and again 1 year later (T1). The secondary outcome measure was the time spent by the clinician delivering the information to the patient. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were randomized into each group. After 1 year, 1 patient was lost in each group. At the time of consent, the conventional group scored 79.1 ± 18.4 compared with 76.4 ± 12.8 for the 3D animation group with no statistically significant difference (95% confidence interval, -11.0 to 5.3), (P = 0.492). One year later, again, there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.639) between the conventional group (75.6 ± 12.3) and the 3D animation group (74.4 ± 9.0) (95% confidence interval, -7.0 to 4.4). The average exposure time to the educational intervention in the conventional group was 8.5 minutes more than the 3D animation group. CONCLUSIONS: The use of 3D animation or verbal and leaflet information is relatively equivalent in transferring knowledge to the orthodontic patient. The use of a 3D animated video reduces the clinician time needed in the clinic to deliver information to the patients and also allows multiple views and better suits the younger generation. Patients undergoing short- or long-term orthodontic treatment do not recall root damage as a risk of orthodontic treatment, which requires special attention from the orthodontist to reinforce this information. REGISTRATION: This trial was not registered. PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement.

Severity and Outcome Assessment score: a useful tool for auditing orthognathic surgery.

Many indices and scoring systems exist for assessing skeletal patterns and malocclusion but none have been universally adopted by teams providing orthognathic surgery in the UK. Using a standardised objective measure of a patient's condition is important both for service provision, treatment allocation, and other clinical governance domains. The Severity and Outcome Assessment tool (SOA) developed by the British Orthodontic Society (BOS) and British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (BAOMS) provides a standardised method of assessing patients throughout the orthognathic pathway and lends itself to case selection, resource allocation and auditing treatment outcomes. The SOA uses 7 cephalometric skeletal, dental and soft tissue measures to produce an overall score.The SOA has been used by the current NHS Tayside orthognathic team since August 2006 to audit treatment outcomes. While we recognise that cephalometric analysis forms only one part of orthognathic treatment we believe that having an objective measure on which to assess treatment is useful. We present our experience of using this quick, simple and reproducible tool in auditing orthognathic treatment outcomes.

Simple Approaches for Establishing an Evidence-Based Dental Practice.

Constructing an evidence-based dental practice requires leadership, commitment, technology support, and time, as well as skill practice in searching, appraising, and organizing evidence. In mastering the skills of evidence-based dentistry, clinicians can implement high-quality science into practice through a variety of opportunities including the development of clinical care guidelines, procedural technique protocols, and electronic dental record auto-note templates, as well as treatment planning, care prioritization, and case presentation. The benefits of building an evidence-based dental practice are many, including improvements in patient care and satisfaction, increased treatment predictability and confidence in care approaches, as well as potential cost savings.

BDA hospital dentists survey 2017.

In 2016 the BDA undertook to investigate the demographics and distribution of its hospital members alongside their morale and motivation. This is the first time the BDA had undertaken such a survey and it is the first time any workforce research into the Hospital Dental Services (HDS) has been published by any party. Subsequent freedom of information requests have suggested that BDA HDS member data is representative of the overall HDS workforce. Of particular note is the distribution of some of the 'smaller' specialties with some seemingly only existing at dental school level alongside morale and motivation levels in relation to other dental roles.

Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Guidelines: Lack of Authors and Disclosures in the AAOMS White Papers.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate current state of authorship, financial disclosures, and conflicts of interest in position papers published by the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional review of the position papers published by the AAOMS from 2013 to 2017. Primary outcome variables include position papers published by the AAOMS. Secondary outcome variables include declaration of authorship, financial disclosures, and financial payments. The Open Payments Database for financial disclosures was reviewed for the year the position paper was published and the immediate preceding year. RESULTS: Ten position papers were published by the AAOMS from 2013 to 2017. Of the 10 papers, authorship was listed in 3, and none explicitly addressed the presence or absence of financial disclosures or conflicts of interest. Contributors to 3 of the 3 authored papers were found at review of the Open Payments Database to have received industry funding in the year the position paper was published and the immediate preceding year. The remuneration ranged from less than $1,000 to $554,006.02. CONCLUSION: Position papers published by the AAOMS lack standardization for authorship and statements on potential financial disclosure. The authors suggest full disclosures of authorship and authors' conflicts of interest should be stated on all position papers to provide transparency to the process.

A multi-centered epidemiological study evaluating the validity of the treatment difficulty indices developed by the Japan Prosthodontic Society.

PURPOSE: The Japan Prosthodontic Society developed a multi-axis assessment protocol to evaluate the complex variations in patients who need prosthodontic care, and to classify the level of treatment difficulty. A previous report found the protocol to be sufficiently reliable. The purpose of this multi-center cohort study was to evaluate the validity of this multi-axis assessment protocol. METHODS: The treatment difficulty was evaluated using the multi-axis assessment protocol before starting prosthodontic treatment. The time required for active prosthodontic treatment, medical resources such as treatment cost, and changes in the oral health-related QOL before and after treatment, were evaluated after treatment completion. The construct validity of this protocol was assessed by the correlation between the dentist's pre-operative subjective assessment of the treatment difficulty, and the level of difficulty determined by this protocol. The predictive validity was assessed estimating the correlations between a "comprehensive level of treatment difficulty" based on the four axes of this protocol and total treatment cost, total treatment time, and changes in the oral health-related QOL before and after treatment. RESULTS: The construct validity of this protocol was well documented except for psychological assessment. Regarding the predictive validity, the comprehensive level of treatment difficulty assessed before treatment was significantly correlated with the three surrogate endpoints known to be related to the treatment difficulty (total treatment cost, treatment time, and improvement in the oral health-related QOL). To further clarify the validity of the protocol according to patients' oral condition, a subgroup analysis by defects was performed. Analyses revealed that treatment difficulty assessment before treatment was significantly related to one or two surrogate endpoints in the fully edentulous patients and the partially edentulous patients. No significant relationship was observed in the patients with mixture of full/partial edentulism and the patients with teeth problems, possibly due to the small sample size in these groups. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that the multi-axis assessment protocol was sufficiently valid to predict the level of treatment difficulty in prosthodontic care in patients with fully edentulous defects and with partially edentulous defects.

Proceedings of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon's 2017 Clinical and Scientific Innovations in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (CSIOMS).

The sixth biennial Clinical and Scientific Innovations in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, formerly the Research Summit, of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons and its Committee on Research Planning and Technology Assessment was held in Rosemont, Illinois from April 28 to 30, 2017. The goal of the symposium is to provide a forum for the latest clinical and scientific advances to be brought to the specialty. It also nurtures collaboration and the development of relationships between oral and maxillofacial surgeons and researchers to bridge the gap between clinical and basic science. The goal is to improve the care of oral and maxillofacial surgical patients through the advancement of translational and clinical research.

Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and Interdisciplinary Dentofacial Therapy: An American Academy of Periodontology Best Evidence Review Focusing on Risk Assessment of the Dentoalveolar Bone Changes Influenced by Tooth Movement.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate whether cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging can be used to assess dentoalveolar anatomy critical to the periodontist when determining risk assessment for patients undergoing orthodontic therapy using fixed or removable appliances. METHODS: Both observational and interventional trials reporting on the use of CBCT imaging assessing the impact of orthodontic/dentofacial orthopedic treatment on periodontal tissues (i.e., alveolar bone) were included. Changes in the alveolar bone thickness and height around natural teeth as well as treatment costs were evaluated. MEDLINE (via PubMed) and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published in the English language, up to and including July 2016, and extracted data were organized into evidence tables. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in this systematic review describing the positive or deleterious changes on the alveolar bone surrounding natural teeth undergoing orthodontic tooth movement or influenced by orthopedic forces through fixed appliances. Clinical recommendation summaries presenting the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence in terms of benefits and harms were generated. CONCLUSIONS: CBCT imaging can improve the periodontal diagnostic acumen regarding alveolar bone alterations influenced by orthodontic tooth movement and can help determine risk assessment prior to such intervention. Clinicians are also better informed to determine risk assessment and develop preventative or plan interceptive periodontal augmentation (soft tissue and/or bone augmentation) therapies for patients undergoing orthodontic tooth movement. These considerations are recognized as being especially critical for treatment approaches in patients where buccal tooth movement (expansion) is planned in the anterior mandible or involving the maxillary premolars.