Outcomes of treatment and monitoring of posterior teeth with cracks: three-year results from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

OBJECTIVES: To describe treatment and monitoring outcomes of posterior teeth with cracks at baseline followed in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network for up to three years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and nine dentists enrolled a convenience sample of 2,858 patients, each with a posterior tooth with at least one visible crack and followed them for three years. Characteristics at the patient, tooth, and crack level were recorded at baseline and at annual recall visits. Data on all teeth referred for extraction were reviewed. Data on all other teeth, treated or monitored, seen at one or more recall visits were reviewed for evidence of failure (subsequent extraction, endodontics, or recommendation for a re-treatment). RESULTS: The survival rate for teeth with cracks at baseline exceeded 98% (only 37 extractions), and the failure rate for teeth that were treated restoratively was only 14%. Also, only about 14% of teeth recommended at baseline for monitoring were later recommended to be treated, and about 6.5% of teeth recommended for monitoring at baseline were later treated without a specific recommendation. Thus, about 80% of teeth recommended at baseline for monitoring continued with a monitoring recommendation throughout the entire three years of the study. Treatment failures were associated with intracoronal restorations (vs. full or partial coverage) and male patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this large 3-year practice-based study conducted across the USA, the survival rate of posterior teeth with a visible crack exceeded 85%. Clinical relevance Dentists can effectively evaluate patient-, tooth-, and crack-level characteristics to determine which teeth with cracks warrant treatment and which only warrant monitoring.

The association between professional stratification and use of online sources: Evidence from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

The use of online information sources in most professions is widespread, and well researched. Less understood is how the use of these sources vary across the strata within a single profession, and how question context affects search behaviour. Using the dental profession as a case of a highly stratified discipline, we examine search preferences for sources by professional strata among dentists in a practice-based network. Results show that variation exists in information search behaviour across professional strata of dental clinicians. This study highlights the importance of addressing information literacy across different levels of a profession. Findings also underscore that search behaviour and source preference vary with perceived question relevance.

Secure Asynchronous Communication Between Smokers and Tobacco Treatment Specialists: Secondary Analysis of a Web-Assisted Tobacco Intervention in the QUIT-PRIMO and National Dental PBRN Networks.

BACKGROUND: Within a web-assisted tobacco intervention, we provided a function for smokers to asynchronously communicate with a trained tobacco treatment specialist (TTS). Previous studies have not attempted to isolate the effect of asynchronous counseling on smoking cessation. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to conduct a semiquantitative analysis of TTS-smoker communication and evaluate its association with smoking cessation. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data on secure asynchronous communication between trained TTSs and a cohort of smokers during a 6-month period. Smokers were able to select their preferred TTS and message them using a secure web-based form. To evaluate whether the TTS used evidence-based practices, we coded messages using the Motivational Interviewing Self-Evaluation Checklist and Smoking Cessation Counseling (SCC) Scale. We assessed the content of messages initiated by the smokers by creating topical content codes. At 6 months, we assessed the association between smoking cessation and the amount of TTS use and created a multivariable model adjusting for demographic characteristics and smoking characteristics at baseline. RESULTS: Of the 725 smokers offered asynchronous counseling support, 33.8% (245/725) messaged the TTS at least once. A total of 1082 messages (TTSs: 565; smokers 517) were exchanged between the smokers and TTSs. The majority of motivational interviewing codes were those that supported client strengths (280/517, 54.1%) and promoted engagement (280/517, 54.1%). SCC code analysis showed that the TTS provided assistance to smokers if they were willing to quit (247/517, 47.8%) and helped smokers prepare to quit (206/517, 39.8%) and anticipate barriers (197/517, 38.1%). The majority of smokers' messages discussed motivations to quit (234/565, 41.4%) and current and past treatments (talking about their previous use of nicotine replacement therapy and medications; 201/565, 35.6%). The majority of TTS messages used behavioral strategies (233/517, 45.1%), offered advice on treatments (189/517, 36.5%), and highlighted motivations to quit (171/517, 33.1%). There was no association between the amount of TTS use and cessation. In the multivariable model, after adjusting for gender, age, race, education, readiness at baseline, number of cigarettes smoked per day at baseline, and the selected TTS, smokers messaging the TTS one or two times had a smoking cessation odds ratio (OR) of 0.8 (95% CI 0.4-1.4), and those that messaged the TTS more than two times had a smoking cessation OR of 1.0 (95% CI 0.4-2.3). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated the feasibility of using asynchronous counseling to deliver evidence-based counseling. Low participant engagement or a lack of power could be potential explanations for the nonassociation with smoking cessation. Future trials should explore approaches to increase participant engagement and test asynchronous counseling in combination with other approaches for improving the rates of smoking cessation.

Clinical acceptance of single-unit crowns and its association with impression and tissue displacement techniques: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The definitive impression for a single-unit crown involves many material and technique factors that may affect the success of the crown. PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective cohort study was to determine whether impression technique (tray selection), impression material, or tissue displacement technique are associated with the clinical acceptability of the crown (CAC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network documented details of the preparation, impression, and delivery of 3730 consecutive single-unit crowns. Mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate associations between impression techniques and materials and the CAC and to assess associations between the presence of a subgingival margin with the displacement technique and the outcome variables CAC and number of impressions required. RESULTS: Of the 3730 crowns, 3589 (96.2%) were deemed clinically acceptable. A significant difference in the CAC was found with different impression techniques (P<.001) and different impression materials (P<.001). The percentage of the CAC for digital scans was 99.5%, 95.8% for dual-arch trays, 95.2% for quadrant trays, and 94.0% for complete-arch impression trays. Although no statistically significant difference was found in the CAC produced with dual-arch trays without both mesial and distal contacts, crowns fabricated under these conditions were less likely to achieve excellent occlusion. The percentage of the CAC for digital scans was 99.5%, 97.0% for polyether impressions, 95.5% for polyvinyl siloxane impressions, and 90.5% for other impression materials. Accounting for the location of the margin, the use of a dual-cord displacement technique was significantly associated with lower rates of requiring more than 1 impression (P=.015, odds ratio=1.43). CONCLUSIONS: Dual-arch trays produced clinically acceptable crowns; however, if the prepared tooth was unbounded, the occlusal fit was more likely to have been compromised. Digital scans produced a slightly higher rate of CAC than conventional impression materials. The use of a dual-cord technique was associated with a decreased need to remake impressions when the margins were subgingival.

Laboratory Technician Assessment of the Quality of Single-Unit Crown Preparations and Impressions as Predictors of the Clinical Acceptability of Crowns as Determined by the Treating Dentist: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

PURPOSE: In-laboratory assessment by laboratory technicians may offer insight to increase clinical success of dental crowns, and research in this area is lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network enrolled patients in a study about single-unit crowns; laboratory technicians evaluated the quality of tooth preparations and impressions. The primary outcome for each crown was clinical acceptability (CAC), as judged by the treating dentist. A secondary outcome was "Goodness of Fit (GOF)," a composite score of several aspects of clinical fit, also judged by the study dentist. A mixed-effects logistic regression was used to analyze associations between laboratory technician ratings and the CAC and GOF. RESULTS: Dentists (n = 205) evaluated 3731 crowns. Technicians ranked the marginal detail of impressions as good or excellent in 92% of cases; other aspects of the impression were ranked good or excellent 88% of the time. Regarding tooth preparation, about 90% of preparations were considered adequate (neither excessive nor inadequate reduction). Factors associated with higher CAC were more preparation taper, and use of optical imaging. Factors associated with better GOF were higher impression quality, greater occlusal reduction, more preparation taper, and optical imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Overall quality of preparations and impressions was very high, as evaluated by laboratory technicians. Several clinical parameters were associated with higher CAC and GOF. Clinicians who struggle with crown remakes might consider less conservative tooth preparation, as well as using digital impression technology.

Training experiences regarding pain management, addiction, and drug diversion of dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Background: The purpose of this study was to describe dentists' training experiences relevant to pain management, addiction, and prescription opioid drug diversion and examine associations between these training experiences and dentists' opioid prescribing practices. Methods: A Web-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted among practicing dentist members of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN; N = 822). The survey assessed pain management prescribing practices and training experiences related to pain management and assessment for addiction and drug diversion. Survey data were linked with National Dental PBRN Enrollment Questionnaire data regarding practitioner demographics and practice characteristics. Results: The majority of dentists (67%) reported prior training in pain management; however, a minority of dentists reported prior training regarding identification and assessment of drug abuse or addiction (48%) or identification of prescription drug diversion (25%). The majority of training experiences across all topics occurred through continuing dental education participation. Dental school training relevant to pain management, addiction, and identification of drug diversion was more prevalent among more recent dental school graduates. Training experiences were associated with prescribing practices. Conclusions: Results suggest that across multiple levels of training, many dentists are not receiving training specific to addiction assessment and identification of drug diversion. Such training is associated with greater consistency of risk mitigation implementation in practice.

Concordance between practitioner questionnaire responses and observed clinical treatment recommendations for treatment of dentin hypersensitivity: findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Few published reports have presented concordance between treatment choices selected by dentists in hypothetical clinical scenarios and treatment choices made by the same dentists in actual clinical practice. The aim of the current cross-sectional study, conducted within the Management of Dental Hypersensitivity (MDH) study, was to assess the potential value of practitioners' questionnaire responses regarding their typical treatment provided for management of dentin hypersensitivity (DH), by evaluating agreement between these responses and subsequently-observed recommendations recorded during actual clinical examinations. METHODS: A total of 171 practitioners enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed both a questionnaire and a clinical study regarding methods they use to treat dental hypersensitivity. The questionnaire solicited first-, second- and third-choice products when prescribing or recommending management of dentin hypersensitivity. Agreement was calculated for first-choice products/recommendations and for inclusion in the top three choices, as identified by the practitioners, from 11 listed treatment options. Overall percent agreement and Cohen's kappa statistic were calculated, with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). Associations between practitioner characteristics and agreement were also evaluated. RESULTS: For individual treatment modalities, percentage agreement ranged from 63 to 99%, depending on the specific item. Percentage agreement between typical treatment and actual treatment for each practitioner's top three treatment modalities, as a combined grouping, ranged from 61 to 100%. When these same agreement pairings were quantified to account for agreement above that expected by chance, kappa values were poor to low. CONCLUSIONS: Concordance between hypothetical clinical scenarios and treatment choices made by the same dentists in actual clinical practice showed moderate to high levels of percentage agreement, but Cohen's kappa values suggested relatively low levels of agreement beyond that expected by chance. This analysis adds to the larger work of the network which has now observed a wide range of agreement between hypothetical and actual care, depending upon the specific diagnosis or treatment under consideration. Questionnaire data for DH might serve as a useful adjunct to clinical data regarding treatment recommendations, but agreement was not sufficiently high to justify use of questionnaires alone to characterize patterns of treatment for this particular condition.

Remake Rates for Single-Unit Crowns in Clinical Practice: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

PURPOSE: Some crowns returned from the laboratory are clinically unacceptable, and dentists must remake them. The objectives of this study were to: (1) quantify the remake rate of single-unit crowns; and (2) identify factors significantly associated with crown remakes and intraoral fit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network recruited patients needing crowns and documented fabrication techniques, patient characteristics, and outcomes. Crowns were considered clinically acceptable or rejected. Also, various aspects of the clinical fit of the crown were graded and categorized as 'Goodness of Fit (GOF).' Dentist and patient characteristics were tested statistically for associations with crown acceptability and GOF. RESULTS: More than 200 dentists participated in this study (N = 205) and evaluated 3750 single-unit crowns. The mean age (years) of patients receiving a crown was 55. The remake rate for crowns was 3.8%. The range of rejection rates among individual practitioners was 0% to 42%. Most clinicians (118, or 58%) did not reject any crowns; all rejections came from 42% of the clinicians (n = 87). The most common reasons for rejections were proximal misfit, marginal errors, and esthetic failures. Fewer years in practice was significantly associated with lower crown success rates and lower fit scores. GOF was also associated with practice busyness and patient insurance status, patient gender (dentists reported better fit for female patients), and patient ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: The crown remake rate in this study was about 4%. Remakes and crown GOF were associated with certain dentist and practice characteristics.

Comparison of the accuracy of CBCT effective radiation dose information in peer-reviewed journals and dental media.

Accessible sources of clinical information have proliferated over the past decade. Although these new sources that contextualize information for practice are user friendly, there are questions about their accuracy because much of the material is not peer reviewed. On the other hand, traditional peer-reviewed material can be somewhat removed from the needs of practicing dentists, and recently questions have been raised about the accuracy of journals. This study assessed the accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) radiation safety information in both professional media and peer-reviewed journals. Articles introducing CBCT technology to dentists and published in peer-reviewed journals were compared to articles appearing in professional magazines, clinically oriented news sites, and blogs written by clinicians for clinicians. The reported radiation doses of CBCT and conventional dental radiographs were recorded, as were conclusions about the comparative doses of these 2 imaging modalities. The proportion of articles reporting CBCT dose to be greater than, equal to, or less than that of conventional dental radiographs was not different between the peer-reviewed and professional media articles during the period 2003-2016. There is weak evidence that the conclusions of peer-reviewed journal articles, but not professional media sources, became more conservative after the 2010 publication of an article in The New York Times that was critical of misinformation concerning the safety and efficacy of CBCT in dentistry. Professional media articles that were not peer reviewed were as accurate as peer-reviewed journals for this topic and during the time period assessed. However, the method used here necessitated a narrow focus, and more studies are needed to broaden understanding.

Impression Techniques Used for Single-Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

PURPOSE: To: (1) determine which impression and gingival displacement techniques practitioners use for single-unit crowns on natural teeth; and (2) test whether certain dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with the use of these techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible for this survey study. The study used a questionnaire developed by clinicians, statisticians, laboratory technicians, and survey experts. The questionnaire was pretested via cognitive interviewing with a regionally diverse group of practitioners. The survey included questions regarding gingival displacement and impression techniques. Survey responses were compared by dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. RESULTS: The response rate was 1777 of 2132 eligible dentists (83%). Regarding gingival displacement, most clinicians reported using either a single cord (35%) or dual cord (35%) technique. About 16% of respondents preferred an injectable retraction technique. For making impressions, the most frequently used techniques and materials are: poly(vinyl siloxane), 77%; polyether, 12%; optical/digital, 9%. A dental auxiliary or assistant made the final impression 2% of the time. Regarding dual-arch impression trays, 23% of practitioners report they typically use a metal frame tray, 60% use a plastic frame, and 16% do not use a dual-arch tray. Clinicians using optical impression techniques were more likely to be private practice owners or associates. CONCLUSIONS: This study documents current techniques for gingival displacement and making impressions for crowns. Certain dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques.

Preparation Techniques Used to Make Single-Unit Crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

PURPOSE: To: (1) determine which preparation techniques clinicians use in routine clinical practice for single-unit crown restorations; (2) test whether certain practice, dentist, and patient characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network participated in a questionnaire regarding preparation techniques, dental equipment used for single-unit crown preparations, scheduled chair time, occlusal clearance determination, location of finish lines, magnification during preparation, supplemental lighting, shade selection, use of intraoral photographs, and trimming dies. Survey responses were compared by dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. RESULTS: Of the 2132 eligible dentists, 1777 (83%) responded to the survey. The top two margin configuration choices for single-unit crown preparation for posterior crowns were chamfer/heavy chamfer (65%) and shoulder (23%). For anterior crowns, the most prevalent choices were the chamfer (54%) and the shoulder (37%) configurations. Regarding shade selection, a combination of dentist, assistant, and patient input was used to select anterior shades 59% of the time. Photographs are used to communicate shade selection with the laboratory in about half of esthetically demanding cases. The ideal finish line was located at the crest of gingival tissue for 49% of respondents; 29% preferred 1 mm below the crest; and 22% preferred the finish line above the crest of tissue. Average chair time scheduled for a crown preparation appointment was 76 ± 21 minutes. Practice and dentist characteristics were significantly associated with margin choice including practice type (p < 0.001), region (p < 0.001), and years since graduation (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Network dentists prefer chamfer/heavy chamfer margin designs, followed by shoulder preparations. These choices were related to practice and dentist characteristics.

Satisfaction with dental care among patients who receive invasive or non-invasive treatment for non-cavitated early dental caries: findings from one region of the National Dental PBRN.

BACKGROUND: The objectives were to: (1) quantify patient satisfaction with treatment for early dental caries overall, and according to whether or not (2a) the patient received invasive treatment; (2b) was high-risk for dental caries, and had dental insurance; and (3) encourage practitioners to begin using non-invasive approaches to early caries management. METHODS: Ten practitioners recorded patient, lesion, and treatment information about non-cavitated early caries lesions. Information on 276 consecutive patients with complete data was included, who received either non-invasive (no dental restoration) or invasive (dental restoration) treatment. Patients completed a patient satisfaction questionnaire and were classified as dissatisfied if they did not "agree" or "strongly agree" with any of 14 satisfaction items. RESULTS: Patients had a mean (± SD) age of 41.8 (±15.8) years, 64% were female and 88% were white. Twenty-five percent (n = 68) were dissatisfied in at least one of the 14 satisfaction items. Satisfaction levels did not significantly vary by patient's gender, race, caries risk category, or affected tooth surface location. Overall, 11% (28 of 276) received invasive treatment; satisfaction did not differ between patients who had invasive or non-invasive treatment. Seven patients received invasive treatment at their request even though that was not what their practitioner recommended; 5 out of 6 were satisfied with their treatment nonetheless. CONCLUSIONS: About one-fourth of patients treated for non-cavitated early caries were dissatisfied with at least some aspect of their dental care experience. Satisfaction of patients who received invasive treatment did not differ from those who received non-invasive treatment.

Management of Dentin Hypersensitivity by National Dental Practice-Based Research Network practitioners: results from a questionnaire administered prior to initiation of a clinical study on this topic.

BACKGROUND: Dentin hypersensitivity (DH) is a common problem encountered in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to identify the management approaches for DH among United States dentists. METHODS: One hundred eighty five National Dental Practice-Based Research Network clinicians completed a questionnaire regarding their preferred methods to diagnose and manage DH in the practice setting, and their beliefs about DH predisposing factors. RESULTS: Almost all dentists (99%) reported using more than one method to diagnose DH. Most frequently, they reported using spontaneous patient reports coupled with excluding other causes of oral pain by direct clinical examination (48%); followed by applying an air blast (26%), applying cold water (12%), and obtaining patient reports after dentist's query (6%). In managing DH, the most frequent first choice was desensitizing, over-the-counter (OTC), potassium nitrate toothpaste (48%), followed by fluorides (38%), and glutaraldehyde/HEMA (3%). A total of 86% of respondents reported using a combination of products when treating DH, most frequently using fluoride varnish and desensitizing OTC potassium nitrate toothpaste (70%). The most frequent predisposing factor leading to DH, as reported by the practitioners, was recessed gingiva (66%), followed by abrasion, erosion, abfraction/attrition lesions (59%) and bruxism (32%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of network practitioners use multiple methods to diagnose and manage DH. Desensitizing OTC potassium nitrate toothpaste and fluoride formulations are the most widely used products to manage DH in dental practice setting.

Repair or Replacement of Restorations: A Prospective cohort study by dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

BACKGROUND: A prospective cohort study that included dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network was conducted to quantify 12-month failures of restorations that were repaired or replaced at baseline. The study tested the hypothesis that no significant differences exist in failure percentages between repaired and replaced restorations after 12 months. It also tested the hypothesis that certain dentist, patient, and restoration characteristics are significantly associated with the incidence of restoration failure. METHODS: Dentists recorded data for 50 or more consecutive defective restorations. The restorations that were either - repaired or replaced were recalled after 12 months and characterized for developing defects. RESULTS: Dentists (N = 195) recorded data on 5,889 restorations; 378 restorations required additional treatment (74 repaired, 171 replaced, 84 teeth received endodontic treatment, and 49 were extracted). Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that additional treatment was more likely to occur if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with replaced (5%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.1), if a molar was restored (7%) compared with premolars or anterior teeth (5% and 6%, respectively) (OR, 1.4; P = .010; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7), and if the primary reason was a fracture (8%) compared with other reasons (6%) (OR, 1.3; P = .033; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6). CONCLUSIONS: An additional treatment was more likely to occur within the first year if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with being replaced (5%). However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment (replacement, endodontic treatment, or extraction) than replaced restorations. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: One year after repair or replacement of a defective restoration, the failure rate was low. However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment than replaced restorations.

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.

Dentists' use of caries risk assessment and individualized caries prevention for their adult patients: Findings from The Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies have examined dentists' subjective ratings of importance of caries risk factors or tested whether dentists use this information in treatment planning. This study tested several hypotheses related to caries risk assessment (CRA) and individualized caries prevention (ICP). METHODS: Data were collected as part of a questionnaire entitled 'Assessment of Caries Diagnosis and Caries Treatment' completed by 547 practitioners who belong to The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN), a consortium of participating practices and dental organizations. RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent of DPBRN dentists perform CRA on their patients. Recently graduated dentists, dentists with busier practices, and those who believe a dentist can predict future caries were the most likely to use CRA. The association between CRA and individualized prevention was weaker than expected (r = 0.21). Dentists who perform CRA provide ICP to 57% of their patients, compared with 42% for dentists who do not perform CRA. Based on their responses to radiographic and clinical scenarios in the questionnaire, dentists who use CRA appear to use this information in restorative decisions. CONCLUSION: A substantial percentage of DPBRN dentists do not perform CRA, and there is not a strong linkage between its use and use of individualized preventive regimens for adult patients. More progress in the implementation of current scientific evidence in this area is warranted.

The Decision to Repair or Replace a Defective Restoration is Affected by Who Placed the Original Restoration: Findings from the National Dental PBRN.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how restoration characteristics are associated with the decision to repair or replace an existing restoration. The following hypotheses were studied: dentists who placed the original restoration are more likely to repair instead of replace restorations (H1) that are in molar teeth; (H2) that are in the upper arch; (H3) that have amalgam restorative material; (H4) if a fracture is not the primary reason for the defect; and (H5) when the restoration comprises more than one surface. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used a consecutive patient/restoration recruitment design. 194 dentists members of a dental practice-based research network recorded data on restorations in permanent teeth that needed repair or replacement. RESULTS: For 6,623 of the 8,770 defective restorations in 6,643 patients, the treatment was provided by the dentist who had not placed the original restoration (75%). The 2-way interaction revealed that dentists who had placed the original restoration often chose to repair when the defective restoration was in a molar, relative to premolar or anterior teeth (OR = 2.2, p <.001); and chose to replace when the restoration had amalgam (OR = 0.5, p < .001), and when it was a fracture compared to another reason (OR = 0.8, p = 001). CONCLUSION: Most dentists are not conservative when they revisit a restoration that they originally placed regardless of type of failure, number of surfaces or material used. However, dentists who had placed the original restoration were significantly more likely to repair it when the defective restoration was in a molar tooth. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Most dentists who placed the original restoration were prone to replace it, however if the defective restoration was located in a molar tooth they would consider repairing it.

Methods dentists use to diagnose primary caries lesions prior to restorative treatment: Findings from The Dental PBRN.

OBJECTIVE: To (1) quantify the diagnostic techniques used by Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) dentists before they decide to treat primary caries lesions surgically and (2) examine whether certain dentist, practice, and patient characteristics are associated with their use. METHODS: A total of 228 DPBRN dentists recorded information on 5,676 consecutive restorations inserted due to primary caries lesions on 3,751 patients. Practitioner-investigators placed a mean of 24.9 (SD = 12.4) restorations. Lesions were categorized as posterior proximal, anterior proximal, posterior occiusal, posterior smooth, or anterior smooth. Techniques used to diagnose the lesion were categorized as clinical assessment, radiographs, and/or optical. Statistical analysis utilized generalized mixed-model ANOVA to account for the hierarchical structure of the data. RESULTS: By lesion category, the diagnostic technique combinations used most frequently were clinical assessment plus radiographs for posterior proximal (47%), clinical assessment for anterior proximal (51%), clinical assessment for posterior occlusal (46%), clinical assessment for posterior smooth (77%), and clinical assessment for anterior smooth (80%). Diagnostic technique was significantly associated with lesion category after adjusting for clustering in dentists (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: These results--obtained during actual clinical procedures rather than from questionnaire-based hypothetical scenarios--quantified the diagnostic techniques most commonly used during the actual delivery of routine restorative care. Diagnostic technique varied by lesion category and with certain practice and patient characteristics.

Dentist and practice characteristics associated with restorative treatment of enamel caries in permanent teeth: multiple-regression modeling of observational clinical data from the National Dental PBRN.

PURPOSE: Current evidence in dentistry recommends non-surgical treatment to manage enamel caries lesions. However, surveyed practitioners report they would restore enamel lesions that are confined to the enamel. Actual clinical data were used to evaluate patient, dentist, and practice characteristics associated with restoration of enamel caries, while accounting for other factors. METHODS: Data from a National Dental Practice-Based Research Network observational study of consecutive restorations placed in previously unrestored permanent tooth surfaces and practice/demographic data from 229 participating network dentists were combined. ANOVA and logistic regression, using generalized estimating equations (GEE) and variable selection within blocks, were used to test the hypothesis that patient, dentist, and practice characteristics were associated with variations in enamel restorations of occlusal and proximal caries compared to dentin lesions, accounting for dentist and patient clustering. RESULTS: Network dentists from five regions placed 6,891 restorations involving occlusal and/or proximal caries lesions. Enamel restorations accounted for 16% of enrolled occlusal caries lesions and 6% of enrolled proximal caries lesions. Enamel occlusal restorations varied significantly (P < 0.05) by patient age and race/ethnicity, dentists' use of caries risk assessment, network region, and practice type. Enamel proximal restorations varied significantly (P < 0.05) by dentist race/ethnicity, network region, and practice type.