Root canal morphology of primary molars - A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study.

Objectives: To evaluate the root and canal morphology of primary maxillary and mandibular molars in an Indian population using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed, where CBCT scans of children less than 10 years of age taken for valid diagnostic purposes previously were considered and images were analyzed. The number of roots, root canals, and variations in morphology were recorded. Left-right symmetry was also noted. Results: A total of 433 deciduous maxillary and mandibular primary molars were studied. It was observed that two separate roots with three separate canals were common in primary mandibular first molars, whereas two separate roots with two canals in each root were common in mandibular second primary molars. In primary maxillary molars, three separate roots with one canal each were the most common. Maxillary first molars (17.21%) and 17.35% second molars had fused distobuccal and palatal roots. It was observed that primary maxillary molars showed more left-right symmetry (86.7% in first molars and 82.7% in second molars) compared to primary mandibular molars (54.05% in first molars and 68% in second molars). Conclusions: It was concluded that in both primary maxillary first and second molars, three separate roots, a mesiobuccal root, a distobuccal root, and a palatal root with one canal in each root, were the most common. Two separate roots with three separate canals were the most common in primary mandibular first molars, whereas two separate roots with two canals each in both roots were more common in mandibular second primary molars.

Perception of Indian Dental Surgeons regarding Molar Incisor Hypomineralization.

AIM: To determine the perception of Indian dental professionals about prevalence, severity, and etiological factors of molar incisor hypomineralization (MIH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey was mailed to dental professionals encompassing various questions regarding etiology, diagnosis, prevalence, and management of MIH. RESULTS: More than 90% of the respondents encounter teeth with hypomineralization in their practice, with less than half of them encountering such teeth on a monthly basis. Among these more than one-third find it difficult to manage one or the other aspect of MIH. The etiology was found to be varying as per the respondents. CONCLUSION: Molar incisor hypomineralization is a common condition encountered by dental professionals with no apparent consensus regarding the anticipated prevalence, severity, and etiology of this condition. Knowledge of clinicians' level of perception could be an incentive for pediatric dentists to become more acquainted with MIH by conducting research into its different aspects.How to cite this article: Upadhyay S, Kumar G, Dhillon JK, Gill NC. Perception of Indian Dental Surgeons regarding Molar Incisor Hypomineralization. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2018;11(2):116-121.

Use of patient-reported outcomes in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: To optimize the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical research, it is first necessary to review the current use of these outcomes in clinical trials to determine under what circumstances they are most useful, and to reveal current limitations. PURPOSE: To investigate current patterns of use of PROs in clinical trials. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted a systematic literature review of all double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials using one or more PROs as a study outcome from 2004 to 2006. Data were abstracted and analyzed with descriptive statistics and logistic regression to characterize the use of PROs in clinical trials. RESULTS: The 180 clinical trials that met the study inclusion criteria used 173 unique instruments to measure a total of 466 PROs. Most PRO measurements were obtained using relatively few PRO instruments, with one-third of PRO instruments applied in more than 1 trial. In multivariable analysis, tests of statistical significance were more often reported for PROs used as primary trial outcomes. Statistically significant PRO outcomes (P<0.05) were more likely among disease-specific PROs compared with general PROs, PROs with a discussion of minimally important difference, and larger trials. CONCLUSIONS: PRO instruments may be improved through efforts to provide centralized electronic administration, cross-validation, and standardized interpretation of clinically relevant outcomes. The majority of PROs used in current clinical trials come from relatively few, commonly used disease-specific PRO instruments within major therapeutic areas.

The Medicare Modernization Act and reimbursement for outpatient chemotherapy: do patients perceive changes in access to care?

BACKGROUND: The primary objectives were to measure and compare time to initiation of chemotherapy for patients undergoing treatment either before or after the enactment of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA), and to measure and compare the location of care for patients undergoing chemotherapy either before or after the enactment of the MMA. METHODS: A Web-based survey was conducted of a convenience sample of patients with cancer. RESULTS: A total of 1421 respondents completed the survey, 684 in the pre-MMA group and 737 in the post-MMA group. Respondents aged >or=65 years in both the pre-MMA and post-MMA groups had a median waiting time to chemotherapy of 3.0 weeks (P = .74). Most respondents aged >or=65 years received chemotherapy in outpatient hospital infusion centers or centers affiliated with private practices (73% in the pre-MMA group vs 62% in the post-MMA group; P = .02). However, in multivariate analysis there was no statistically significant difference in treatment location between the pre-MMA and post-MMA cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the findings do not support generalizations from anecdotal reports that patients have been affected by the change in reimbursement to oncologists for chemotherapy as a result of the MMA. The analysis may be confounded by payments to physicians in the concurrent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services cancer demonstration project because these payments may have delayed changes in care. Moreover, research is needed to examine the effects of the legislation on vulnerable populations.

Perspectives of clinical research coordinators on disclosing financial conflicts of interest to potential research participants.

BACKGROUND: Disclosing financial interests to potential research participants during the informed consent process is one strategy for managing conflicts of interest. Given that clinical research coordinators are typically charged with administering the informed consent process, it is critical to understand their experiences, attitudes and beliefs regarding the disclosure of financial interests in research. PURPOSE: To understand the role of clinical research coordinators in disclosing financial interests in research, and potential barriers to such disclosures. METHODS: We developed a survey designed to measure clinical research coordinators' awareness of financial interests in clinical research, previous experience with disclosing financial interests, comfort with answering questions about financial interests and barriers to disclosing financial interests to potential research participants. Next we conducted cognitive interviews with 10 clinical research coordinators to assess understandability and content validity and to further refine the survey. We then administered the survey to clinical research coordinators attending the 2006 Global Conference of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals. RESULTS: Among 300 clinical research coordinators who completed the survey, there was a general awareness of financial interests in research. Forty-one percent reported disclosing such financial interests to potential research participants, and 28% reported being asked about them. Greater comfort in responding to questions about financial interests was associated with previous experience with disclosure, previous experience answering questions about financial interests, and greater length of time obtaining informed consent. Respondents indicated that there were barriers to disclosure, including lack of information (76%) and that participants would not understand disclosures (26%). LIMITATIONS: Possible sample bias due to using a convenience sample. CONCLUSIONS: Making information about financial interests in research readily available to clinical research coordinators, as well as providing education and training, should facilitate the disclosure of financial interests in research to potential research participants during the informed consent process.

Disclosing conflicts of interest in clinical research: views of institutional review boards, conflict of interest committees, and investigators.

Strategies for disclosing investigators' financial interests to potential research participants have been adopted by many research institutions. However, little is known about how decisions are made regarding disclosures of financial interests to potential research participants, including what is disclosed and the rationale for making these determinations. We sought to understand the attitudes, beliefs, and practices of institutional review board chairs, conflict of interest committee chairs, and investigators regarding disclosure of financial interests to potential research participants. Several themes emerged, including general attitudes toward conflicts of interest, circumstances in which financial interests should be disclosed, rationales and benefits of disclosure, what should be disclosed, negative effects of and barriers to disclosure, and timing and presentation of disclosure. Respondents cited several rationales for disclosure, including enabling informed decision making, promoting trust in researchers and research institutions, and reducing legal liability. There was general agreement that disclosure should happen early in the consent process. Respondents disagreed about whether to disclose the amounts of particular financial interests. Clarifying the goals of disclosure and understanding how potential research participants use the information will be critical in efforts to ensure the integrity of clinical research and to protect the rights and interests of participants.

Comparison of conflict of interest policies and reported practices in academic medical centers in the United States.

The authors reviewed the conflict of interest policies of 9 academic medical centers in the United States and interviewed members of the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Conflict of Interest Committees (COICs) at those institutions. They found that many institutions used processes for reporting and managing conflicts of interest that were more decentralized than the processes described in their policies. Also, most institutions had no clear and comprehensive policy to guide investigators regarding disclosure of conflicts of interest to potential research participants. Considerable differences in understanding of conflict of interest policies were observed between IRB and COIC officials.