Development and validation of a rule-based algorithm to identify periodontal diagnosis using structured electronic health record data.

AIM: To develop and validate an automated electronic health record (EHR)-based algorithm to suggest a periodontal diagnosis based on the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal Diseases and Conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using material published from the 2017 World Workshop, a tool was iteratively developed to suggest a periodontal diagnosis based on clinical data within the EHR. Pertinent clinical data included clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival margin to cemento-enamel junction distance, probing depth, furcation involvement (if present) and mobility. Chart reviews were conducted to confirm the algorithm's ability to accurately extract clinical data from the EHR, and then to test its ability to suggest an accurate diagnosis. Subsequently, refinements were made to address limitations of the data and specific clinical situations. Each refinement was evaluated through chart reviews by expert periodontists at the study sites. RESULTS: Three-hundred and twenty-three charts were manually reviewed, and a periodontal diagnosis (healthy, gingivitis or periodontitis including stage and grade) was made by expert periodontists for each case. After developing the initial version of the algorithm using the unmodified 2017 World Workshop criteria, accuracy was 71.8% for stage alone and 64.7% for stage and grade. Subsequently, 16 modifications to the algorithm were proposed and 14 were accepted. This refined version of the algorithm had 79.6% accuracy for stage alone and 68.8% for stage and grade together. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a rule-based algorithm for suggesting a periodontal diagnosis using EHR data can be implemented with moderate accuracy in support of chairside clinical diagnostic decision making, especially for inexperienced clinicians. Grey-zone cases still exist, where clinical judgement will be required. Future applications of similar algorithms with improved performance will depend upon the quality (completeness/accuracy) of EHR data.

Patient and dentist perspectives on collecting patient reported outcomes after painful dental procedures in the National Dental PBRN.

BACKGROUND: Dental Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) relate to a dental patient's subjective experience of their oral health. How practitioners and patients value PROs influences their successful use in practice. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 practitioners and 32 patients who provided feedback on using a mobile health (mHealth) platform to collect the pain experience after dental procedures. A themes analysis was conducted to identify implementation barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: Five themes were uncovered: (1) Sense of Better Care. (2) Tailored Follow-up based on the dental procedure and patient's pain experience. (3) Effective Messaging and Alerts. (4) Usable Digital Platform. (5) Routine mHealth Integration. CONCLUSION: Frequent automated and preferably tailored follow-up messages using an mHealth platform provided a positive care experience for patients, while providers felt it saved them time and effort. Patients thought that the mHealth questionnaires were well-developed and of appropriate length. The mHealth platform itself was perceived as user-friendly by users, and most would like to continue using it. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patients are prepared to use mobile phones to report their pain experience after dental procedures. Practitioners will be able to close the post-operative communication gap with their patients, with little interruption of their workflow.

Study protocol: understanding pain after dental procedures, an observational study within the National Dental PBRN.

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.

Presence of management, entrepreneurship, leadership and marketing topics in the dental school curriculum in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: To analyse the presence and characteristics of curricular components related to management, entrepreneurship, leadership and marketing as part of the structure and teaching methods of undergraduate courses in dentistry in Brazil. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an observational study that used the Ministry of Education's Undergraduate Course Accreditation Platform, which included 424 undergraduate courses in Dentistry on the last date of collection (August 31 2019). The following items were analysed as follows: the existence of curricular components in relation to the proposed themes, the most recurring denominations of curricular components, minimum and maximum workload, mandatory/optional classification, theoretical/practical teaching condition and in which year the curricular components were inserted. RESULTS: 367/424 (86.6%) of dentistry courses in Brazil included at least one of the topics: management, entrepreneurship, leadership and marketing curricular components in their curriculum, whilst 57/424 (13.4%) did not have these curricular components in their curricular structure. The most frequent names were "Management" 99 (45.21%) and "Entrepreneurship" 80 (36.5%). There was a predominance of the "theoretical method" and the number of hours varied considerably, with the most common course hours between 40 and 60 h. The majority of curricular components were inserted in the third to fifth year and offered on a compulsory basis. CONCLUSION: Most curricular matrices of dentistry courses in Brazil had components related to the topics studied. However, due to the variety of curricular components' names, hours, periods of courses and different teaching methodologies, there is a need to redesign the teaching and learning process, defining educational and evaluation models with common curricular components.

Assessing the completeness of periodontal disease documentation in the EHR: a first step in measuring the quality of care.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to measure the proportion of patients for which comprehensive periodontal charting, periodontal disease risk factors (diabetes status, tobacco use, and oral home care compliance), and periodontal diagnoses were documented in the electronic health record (EHR). We developed an EHR-based quality measure to assess how well four dental institutions documented periodontal disease-related information. An automated database script was developed and implemented in the EHR at each institution. The measure was validated by comparing the findings from the measure with a manual review of charts. RESULTS: The overall measure scores varied significantly across the four institutions (institution 1 = 20.47%, institution 2 = 0.97%, institution 3 = 22.27% institution 4 = 99.49%, p-value < 0.0001). The largest gaps in documentation were related to periodontal diagnoses and capturing oral homecare compliance. A random sample of 1224 charts were manually reviewed and showed excellent validity when compared with the data generated from the EHR-based measure (Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, and NPV > 80%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the feasibility of developing automated data extraction scripts using structured data from EHRs, and successfully implementing these to identify and measure the periodontal documentation completeness within and across different dental institutions.

Are Dental Patients Concerned About Safety? An Exploratory Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study addresses a gap in the literature regarding dental patients' perceptions about safety at the dental office and their attitudes toward reporting safety concerns and experiences. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with adult dental patients at an academic dental institution over a 6-week study period. A 16-item questionnaire was distributed to the patients to assess (1) past safety concerns and experiences during dental visits; (2) factors affecting the future reporting of safety concerns and experiences; (3) overall concern about safety at the dental office; (4) overall perceptions that patients should report of safety concerns or experiences to dental providers and staff. RESULTS: A majority (63.5%) of dental patients were concerned about safety at the dental office, although only one-third of them shared their past safety concerns or experiences with their dental providers or clinic staff. Irrespective of their past experiences, most patients (96.9%) believed that patients should report any safety concerns or experiences to the clinic. Being female, highly educated, and having poor oral health were associated with a decreased overall perception that patients should report safety concerns and experiences to dental care providers and staff. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that dental patients are concerned about safety and can be valuable sources of data, when adequately engaged. The current level of patient reporting of safety concerns and/or experiences to clinic staff or care providers is not optimal for learning and improvement. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Better patient engagement in safety activities will potentially increase our collective understanding of threats to safety. Therefore, dental clinics need to encourage patients to speak up about their safety concerns or experiences.

Quantitative evaluation of maxillary alveolar cortical bone thickness and density using computed tomography imaging.

INTRODUCTION: Primary stability is essential to the success of orthodontic mini-implants (OMIs) and heavily depends on the mechanical retention between OMIs and their supporting bone. Alveolar cortical bone commonly serves as the supporting bone for OMIs during treatment. The purposes of this study were to characterize alveolar cortical bone thickness and density in the maxilla and to explore patient factors that may significantly affect these bone properties. METHODS: Sixty medical computed tomography scans of the maxilla were analyzed from a selected sample of patients seen at the Radiology Department of Boston Children's Hospital. Interradicular alveolar bone thickness and density were measured at 2, 4, 6, and 8 mm from the buccal and palatal alveolar bone crests using the Synapse 3D software (version 4.1; FUJIFILM Medical Systems USA, Stamford, Conn). Analyses were conducted with STATA /1C (version 12.0 for Windows; StataCorp, College Station, Tex) using multivariate mixed-effects regression models and paired t tests. RESULTS: Mean age and body mass index of the study sample were 17.88 years and 22.94 kg/m2, respectively. Cortical bone density and thickness significantly increased from the coronal (2 mm) to the apical (8 mm) regions of the alveolar bone (P <0.05). At 8 mm from the alveolar crest, interradicular buccal cortical bone was thickest (1 mm) and densest (1395 Hounsfield units) between the first and second molars. On the palatal side, the thickest bone (1.15 mm) was found between the canine and first premolar; it was similarly densest (1406 Hounsfield units) between the first premolar and canine, and between the first premolar and second premolar interradicular bones. On average, palatal cortical bone was thicker and denser compared with buccal; this difference was statistically significant (P <0.01) in the anterior and middle maxilla, with the anterior maxillary region showing the greatest difference. Female subjects have significantly denser bone compared with male subjects; however, sex is not significantly associated with bone thickness. Body mass index and age are positively associated with bone thickness and density. Radiologic absence of bone was more commonly seen in the anterior maxilla. CONCLUSIONS: Alveolar bone properties vary in the maxilla in patterns that could guide clinicians in selecting sites best suited for placement of OMIs.

Developing and assessing the use of demonstration videos in the preclinical simulation laboratory.

PURPOSE: This study aims to report the development of a preclinical simulation laboratory Demonstration Video Series (DVS) for the 2021-2022 academic year, measure its usage and usefulness, and compare these findings to the usage and usefulness of the existing didactic lecture videos. METHODS: The DVS videos were intended to be viewed before each preclinical simulation laboratory session along with the pre-existing didactic lectures (DL) by University of California San Francisco (UCSF) learners. Usage measurements included the percentage of the class that viewed each video, the number of views that each video received, and the average duration of each video that was watched. Usefulness of the videos was measured by a survey that assessed learner perspective on knowledge and ability to apply that knowledge during the simulation lab exercises. Both usage and usefulness of the DVS were then compared to the usage and usefulness of the DL. Both descriptive statistics and independent sample hypothesis tests were performed to compare the differences in proportion between DVS and DL mediums. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found in terms of both usage and usefulness of the DVS compared to the DL, with DVS being utilized more overall. With an 81% response rate, survey analysis revealed statistically significant differences among the learners' perspectives on the usefulness of the DVS compared to the DL, with a clear preference for the DVS over the DL and an overwhelmingly positive perception of the DVS. CONCLUSION: The DVS was found to be a valuable addition to the preclinical laboratory sessions for first-year learners.

The Nature of Adverse Events in Dentistry.

OBJECTIVES: Learning from clinical data on the subject of safety with regards to patient care in dentistry is still largely in its infancy. Current evidence does not provide epidemiological estimates on adverse events (AEs) associated with dental care. The goal of the dental practice study was to quantify and describe the nature and severity of harm experienced in association with dental care, and to assess for disparities in the prevalence of AEs. METHODS: Through a multistaged sampling procedure, we conducted in-depth retrospective review of patients' dental and medical records. RESULTS: We discovered an AE proportion of 1.4% (95% CI, 1.1% to 1.8). At least two-thirds of the detected AEs were preventable. Eight percent of patients who experienced harm due to a dental treatment presented only to their physician and not to the dentist where they originally received care. CONCLUSIONS: Although most studies of AEs have focused on hospital settings, our results show that they also occur in ambulatory care settings. Extrapolating our data, annually, at least 3.3 million Americans experience harm in relation to outpatient dental care, of which over 2 million may be associated with an error. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Measurement is foundational in enabling learning and improvement. A critical first step in preventing errors and iatrogenic harm in dentistry is to understand how often these safety incidents occur, what type of incidents occur, and what the consequences are in terms of patient suffering, and cost to the healthcare system.

Learning from data in dentistry: Summary of the third annual OpenWide conference.

The overarching goal of the third scientific oral health symposium was to introduce the concept of a learning health system to the dental community and to identify and discuss cutting-edge research and strategies using data for improving the quality of dental care and patient safety. Conference participants included clinically active dentists, dental researchers, quality improvement experts, informaticians, insurers, EHR vendors/developers, and members of dental professional organizations and dental service organizations. This report summarizes the main outputs of the third annual OpenWide conference held in Houston, Texas, on October 12, 2022, as an affiliated meeting of the American Dental Association (ADA) 2022 annual conference.

The burden of diagnostic error in dentistry: A study on periodontal disease misclassification.

BACKGROUND: Periodontal disease constitutes a widely prevalent category of non-communicable diseases and ranks among the top 10 causes of disability worldwide. Little however is known about diagnostic errors in dentistry. In this work, by retrospectively deploying an electronic health record (EHR)-based trigger tool, followed by gold standard manual review, we provide epidemiological estimates on the rate of diagnostic misclassification in dentistry through a periodontal use case. METHODS: An EHR-based trigger tool (a retrospective record review instrument that uses a list of triggers (or clues), i.e., data elements within the health record, to alert reviewers to the potential presence of a wrong diagnosis) was developed, tested and run against the EHR at the two participating sites to flag all cases having a potential misdiagnosis. All cases flagged as potentially misdiagnosed underwent extensive manual reviews by two calibrated domain experts. A subset of the non-flagged cases was also manually reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 2,262 patient charts met the study's inclusion criteria. Of these, the algorithm flagged 1,124 cases as potentially misclassified and 1,138 cases as potentially correctly diagnosed. When the algorithm identified a case as potentially misclassified, compared to the diagnosis assigned by the gold standard, the kappa statistic was 0.01. However, for cases the algorithm marked as potentially correctly diagnosed, the review against the gold standard showed a kappa statistic of 0.9, indicating near perfect agreement. The observed proportion of diagnostic misclassification was 32 %. There was no significant difference by clinic or provider characteristics. CONCLUSION: Our work revealed that about a third of periodontal cases are misclassified. Diagnostic errors have been reported to happen more frequently than other types of errors, and to be more preventable. Benchmarking diagnostic quality is a first step. Subsequent research endeavor will delve into comprehending the factors that contribute to diagnostic errors in dentistry and instituting measures to prevent them. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study sheds light on the significance of diagnostic excellence in the delivery of dental care, and highlights the potential role of technology in aiding diagnostic decision-making at the point of care.

Evaluating and improving the usability of a mHealth platform to assess postoperative dental pain.

Objectives: The use of interactive mobile health (mHealth) applications to monitor patient-reported postoperative pain outcomes is an emerging area in dentistry that requires further exploration. This study aimed to evaluate and improve the usability of an existing mHealth application. Materials and methods: The usability of the application was assessed iteratively using a 3-phase approach, including a rapid cognitive walkthrough (Phase I), lab-based usability testing (Phase II), and in situ pilot testing (Phase III). The study team conducted Phase I, while providers and patients participated in Phase II and III. Results: The rapid cognitive walkthrough identified 23 potential issues that could negatively impact user experience, with the majority classified as system issues. The lab-based usability testing yielded 141 usability issues.; 43% encountered by patients and 57% by dentists. Usability problems encountered during pilot testing included undelivered messages due to mobile phone carrier and service-related issues, errors in patients' phone number data entry, and problems in provider training. Discussion: Through collaborative and iterative work with the vendor, usability issues were addressed before launching a trial to assess its efficacy. Conclusion: The usability of the mHealth application for postoperative dental pain was remarkably improved by the iterative analysis and interdisciplinary collaboration.

Assessing the safety of deep sedation in outpatient pediatric oral health care.

BACKGROUND: Children are the patient subgroup with the lowest error tolerance regarding deep sedation (DS)-supported care. This study assessed the safety of DS-supported pediatric dental treatment carried out in an outpatient setting through retrospective review of patient charts. METHODS: An automated script was developed to identify charts of pediatric patients who underwent DS-supported dental procedures from 2017 through 2019 at a dental clinic. Charts were assessed for the presence of sedation-related adverse events (AEs). A panel of experts performed a second review and confirmed or refuted the designation of AE (by the first reviewer). AEs were classified with the Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation system. RESULTS: Of the 175 DS cases, 19 AEs were identified in 15 cases (8.60%). Using the Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation classification system, 7 (36.84%) events were related to the airway and breathing category, 9 (47.37%) were related to sedation quality (including a dizzy patient who fell at the checkout desk and sustained a head laceration), and 3 (15.79%) were classified as an allergy. CONCLUSION: This study suggests an AE (whether relatively minor or of potentially major consequence) occurs in 1 of every 12 DS cases involving pediatric patients, performed at an outpatient dental clinic. Larger studies are needed, in addition to root cause analyses. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: As dentists increasingly pivot in the use of DS services from in-hospital to outpatient settings, patients expect comparable levels of safety. This work helps generate evidence to drive targeted efforts to improve the safety and reliability of pediatric outpatient sedation.

Designing audit and feedback dashboards for dentists to monitor their opioid prescribing.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Prescription drug abuse is a major factor leading to drug overdose deaths in the US and dentists are one of the leading prescribers of opioid pain medication. Knowing that Audit & Feedback (A&F) dashboards are an effective tool and are used as quality improvement interventions, we aimed to develop such dashboards personalized for dental providers which could allow them to monitor their own opioid prescribing performance. METHODS: In this paper we report on the process for designing the A&F dashboards for dentists which were developed by using an iterative human-centered design process. The results obtained from each iteration were used to enrich the information needs analyses, provide function testing, and guide the design decisions of the next iteration. RESULTS: Engaging dentists in the development and refinement of the dashboards while using the think-aloud protocol for user-testing, provided rapid feedback and identified areas that were confusing and needed either a redesign or additional explanatory content. The final version of dashboards consisted of displaying necessary information through easy to interpret visualizations and interactive features. These included providing access to current national and organizational prescribing guidelines, displaying changes in individual prescribing behavior over time, comparing individual prescribing rate to peer group rate and target rate, displaying procedure specific prescribing, integrating patient reported post-operative dental pain experience and providing navigation and interpretation tips for users. The dashboards were easy to learn and understand for the dentists and were deemed as worth using often in dental practice. CONCLUSION: Our research was able to demonstrate the creation of useful and usable A&F dashboards using data from electronic dental records and patient surveys, for dentists to effectively monitor their opioid prescribing behavior. Efficacy of the dashboards will be tested in future work.

Development of quality measures to assess tooth decay outcomes from electronic health record data.

OBJECTIVES: To develop outcomes of care quality measures derived from the dental electronic health record (EHR) to assess the occurrence and timely treatment of tooth decay. METHODS: Quality measures were developed to assess whether decay was treated within 6 months and if new decay occurred in patients seen. Using EHR-derived data of the state of each tooth surface, algorithms compared the patient's teeth at different dates to determine if decay was treated or new decay had occurred. Manual chart reviews were conducted at three sites to validate the measures. The measures were implemented and scores were calculated for three sites over four calendar years, 2016 through 2019. RESULTS: About 954 charts were manually reviewed for the timely treatment of tooth decay measure, with measure performance of sensitivity 97%, specificity 85%, positive predictive value (PPV) 91%, negative predictive value (NPV) 95%. About 739 charts were reviewed for new decay measure, with sensitivity 94%, specificity 99%, PPV 99%, and NPV 94%. Across all sites and years, 52.8% of patients with decay were fully treated within 6 months of diagnosis (n = 247,959). A total of 23.8% of patients experienced new decay, measured at an annual exam (n = 640,004). CONCLUSION: Methods were developed and validated for assessing timely treatment of decay and occurrence of new decay derived from EHR data, creating effective outcome measures. These EHR-based quality measures produce accurate and reliable results that support efforts and advancement in quality assessment, quality improvement, patient care and research.

Identifying Contributing Factors Associated With Dental Adverse Events Through a Pragmatic Electronic Health Record-Based Root Cause Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed contributing factors associated with dental adverse events (AEs). METHODS: Seven electronic health record-based triggers were deployed identifying potential AEs at 2 dental institutions. From 4106 flagged charts, 2 reviewers examined 439 charts selected randomly to identify and classify AEs using our dental AE type and severity classification systems. Based on information captured in the electronic health record, we analyzed harmful AEs to assess potential contributing factors; harmful AEs were defined as those that resulted in temporary moderate to severe harm, required hospitalization, or resulted in permanent moderate to severe harm. We classified potential contributing factors according to (1) who was involved (person), (2) what were they doing (tasks), (3) what tools/technologies were they using (tools/technologies), (4) where did the event take place (environment), (5) what organizational conditions contributed to the event? (organization), (6) patient (including parents), and (7) professional-professional collaboration. A blinded panel of dental experts conducted a second review to confirm the presence of an AE. RESULTS: Fifty-nine cases had 1 or more harmful AEs. Pain occurred most frequently (27.1%), followed by nerve injury (16.9%), hard tissue injury (15.2%), and soft tissue injury (15.2%). Forty percent of the cases were classified as "temporary not moderate to severe harm." Person (training, supervision, and fatigue) was the most common contributing factor (31.5%), followed by patient (noncompliance, unsafe practices at home, low health literacy, 17.1%), and professional-professional collaboration (15.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Pain was the most common harmful AE identified. Person, patient, and professional-professional collaboration were the most frequently assessed factors associated with harmful AEs.

Evaluating the Impact of an mHealth Platform for Managing Acute Postoperative Dental Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Postoperative dental pain is pervasive and can 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 a mobile health (mHealth) platform to collect pain-related patient-reported outcomes over 7 days after the patients underwent pain-inducing dental procedures; we then relayed the information to the dentist and determined its impact on the patient's pain experience. Methods: The study used a cluster-randomized experimental study design with an intervention arm where patients were prompted to complete a series of questions relating to their pain experience after receiving automated text notifications on their smartphone on days 1, 3, 5, and 7, with the resulting information fed back to dentists, and 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 1525 patients participated. For the primary outcome (pain intensity on a 1 to 10 scale, with 10 being the most painful), intervention group patients reported an average pain intensity of 4.8 (SD 2.6), while those in the control group reported an average pain intensity 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 a 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, and 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, postoperative complication management, and ability to manage pain medication prescribing. Expanded collaboration between mHealth developers and frontline health care providers can facilitate the applicability of these platforms, further help improve its integration with the normal clinic workflow, and assist in moving toward a more patient-centric approach to pain management.

Testing dental quality measures: Emergency department visits for nontraumatic dental conditions and subsequent follow-up dental visits.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to test the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Dental Quality Alliance's adult dental quality measures for system-level implementation for ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) emergency department (ED) visits for nontraumatic dental conditions (NTDCs) in adults and follow-up after ED visits for NTDCs in adults. METHODS: Medicaid enrollment and claims data from Oregon and Iowa were used for measure testing. Testing included validation of diagnosis codes in claims data through patient record reviews of ED visits and calculations of κ statistic, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: Adult Medicaid enrollees' ACS NTDC ED visits ranged from 209 through 310 per 100,000 member-months. In both states, patients in the age category 25 through 34 years and non-Hispanic Black patients had the highest rates of ACS ED visits for NTDCs. Only one-third of all ED visits were associated with a follow-up dental visit within 30 days, decreasing to approximately one-fifth with a 7-day follow-up. The agreement between the claims data and patient records for identification of ACS ED visits for NTDCs was 93%, κ statistic was 0.85, sensitivity was 92%, and specificity was 94%. CONCLUSIONS: Testing revealed the feasibility, reliability, and validity of 2 DQA quality measures. Most beneficiaries did not have a follow-up with a dentist within 30 days of an ED visit. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Adoption of quality measures by state Medicaid programs and other integrated care systems will enable active tracking of beneficiaries with ED visits for NTDCs and develop strategies to connect them to dental homes.

Development of a Quality Improvement Dental Chart Review Training Program.

INTRODUCTION: Chart review is central to understanding adverse events (AEs) in medicine. In this article, we describe the process and results of educating chart reviewers assigned to evaluate dental AEs. METHODS: We developed a Web-based training program, "Dental Patient Safety Training," which uses both independent and consensus-based curricula, for identifying AEs recorded in electronic health records in the dental setting. Training included (1) didactic education, (2) skills training using videos and guided walkthroughs, (3) quizzes with feedback, and (4) hands-on learning exercises. In addition, novice reviewers were coached weekly during consensus review discussions. TeamExpert was composed of 2 experienced reviewers, and TeamNovice included 2 chart reviewers in training. McNemar test, interrater reliability, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated to compare accuracy rates on the identification of charts containing AEs at the start of training and 7 months after consensus building discussions between the 2 teams. RESULTS: TeamNovice completed independent and consensus development training. Initial chart reviews were conducted on a shared set of charts (n = 51) followed by additional training including consensus building discussions. There was a marked improvement in overall percent agreement, prevalence and bias-adjusted κ correlation, and diagnostic measures (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) of reviewed charts between both teams from the phase I training program to phase II consensus building. CONCLUSIONS: This study detailed the process of training new chart reviewers and evaluating their performance. Our results suggest that standardized training and continuous coaching improves calibration between experts and trained chart reviewers.

Building Consensus for a Shared Definition of Adverse Events: A Case Study in the Profession of Dentistry.

BACKGROUND: To achieve high-quality health care, adverse events (AEs) must be proactively recognized and mitigated. However, there is often ambiguity in applying guidelines and definitions. We describe the iterative calibration process needed to achieve a shared definition of AEs in dentistry. Our alignment process includes both independent and consensus building approaches. OBJECTIVE: We explore the process of defining dental AEs and the steps necessary to achieve alignment across different care providers. METHODS: Teams from 4 dental institutions across the United States iteratively reviewed patient records after identification of charts using an automated trigger tool. Calibration across teams was supported through negotiated definition of AEs and standardization of evidence provided in review. Interrater reliability was assessed using descriptive and κ statistics. RESULTS: After 5 iterative cycles of calibration, the teams (n = 8 raters) identified 118 cases. The average percent agreement for AE determination was 82.2%. Furthermore, the average, pairwise prevalence and bias-adjusted κ (PABAK) was 57.5% (κ = 0.575) for determining AE presence. The average percent agreement for categorization of the AE type was 78.5%, whereas the PABAK was 48.8%. Lastly, the average percent agreement for categorization of AE severity was 82.2% and the corresponding PABAK was 71.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Successful calibration across reviewers is possible after consensus building procedures. Higher levels of agreement were found when categorizing severity (of identified events) rather than the events themselves. Our results demonstrate the need for collaborative procedures as well as training for the identification and severity rating of AEs.