Persistence of smoking-cessation decision support use in a dental practice.

INTRODUCTION: A computer-assisted tobacco decision support tool increased dental practitioners' (dentists and dental hygienists) advice to quit smoking and referral to a quitline during a group randomized trial. The purpose of this study is to document the extent to which use persisted after the trial. METHODS: Electronic dental record (EDR) data from 2010 to 2013 were analyzed in 2014 for use of computer-assisted tobacco intervention tool advice scripts and referral to a quitline during four periods: during the trial and post-trial when only intervention clinic dental practitioners had access to the tool, and during full deployment, both before and after an EDR modification. RESULTS: Intervention clinic dental practitioners (18.5 dentist full-time equivalents [FTEs] and 27.8 dental hygienist FTEs practicing in seven clinics) referred 19.0% of 1,368 smokers to a quitline during the trial and referred 15.4% of 4,011 smokers post-trial. After full tool deployment but pre-EDR change, these dental practitioners referred 15.6% of 2,214 intervention clinic smokers, whereas 18.3 dentist FTEs and 29.7 dental hygienist FTEs practicing in eight clinics referred 8.5% of 2,113 smokers. Post-EDR change, dental practitioners referred 12.2% of 2,214 intervention clinic smokers and 8.1% of 2,399 control clinic smokers to a quitline. In the last three quarters of observation, clinic script use ranged from 15.4% to 65.8% and referral to a quitline ranged from 2.0% to 18.7% of visits. CONCLUSIONS: Although EDR design affected rates of referral, dental practitioners persisted in using a computer-assisted tobacco intervention tool to refer smokers to a quitline.

Agreement among dentists' restorative treatment planning thresholds for primary occlusal caries, primary proximal caries, and existing restorations: findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to quantify the agreement among individual National Dental Practice-Based Research Network dentists' self-reported treatment decisions for primary occlusal caries, primary proximal caries, and existing restorations. METHODS: Five hypothetical clinical scenarios were presented: primary occlusal caries; primary proximal caries; and whether three existing restorations should be repaired or replaced. We quantified the probability that dentists who recommended later restorative intervention for primary caries were the same ones who recommended that existing restorations be repaired instead of replaced. RESULTS: Dentists who recommended later restorative treatment of primary occlusal caries and proximal caries at a more-advanced stage were significantly more likely to recommend repair instead of replacement. Agreement among dentists on a threshold stage for the treatment of primary caries ranged from 40 to 68%, while that for repair or replacement of existing restorations was 36 to 43%. CONCLUSIONS: Dentists who recommended repair rather than replacement of existing restorations were significantly more likely to recommend later treatment of primary caries. Conversely, dentists who recommended treatment of primary caries at an earlier stage were significantly more likely to recommend replacement of the entire restoration. Between-dentist agreement for primary caries treatment was better than between-dentist agreement for repair or replacement of existing restorations. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These findings suggest consistency in how individual dentists approach the treatment of primary caries and existing restorations. However, substantial variation was found between dentists in their treatment decisions about the same teeth.