The Evidence-practice Gap in Minimal Intervention Dentistry: An International Comparison Between Dentists in Japan and Brazil.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to: 1) evaluate and compare the evidence-practice gap (EPG) in minimal intervention dentistry (MID) in Japan and Brazil by measuring concordance between dentists' clinical practice and published evidence; and 2) identify dentists' factors associated with the EPG in both countries. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study using a web-delivered questionnaire among 136 Japanese and 110 Brazilian dentists. The questionnaire consisted of three questions concerning "restoration diagnosis and treatment," "deep caries diagnosis and treatment," and "caries risk assessment" regarding MID. A chi-square test was used to analyze differences in concordance among clinical practice and evidence from the literature between Japanese and Brazilian dentists. Logistic regression analyses were performed to analyze dentists' factors associated with overall concordance for all three questions. RESULTS: Overall concordance was significantly higher in Brazil (55%) than in Japan (38%) (p<0.01). Concerning how evidence was obtained, textbooks, nonacademic journals, and seminars and workshops were used as information sources more frequently by Japanese than Brazilian dentists (p<0.001), whereas scientific journal articles in English were used more frequently by Brazilian dentists (p<0.001). On logistic regression analysis, overall concordance was higher for Japanese dentists who frequently obtained evidence from scientific journal articles in English (p<0.05), whereas Brazilian dentists who frequently obtained evidence from the Internet were associated with lower overall concordance (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Because overall concordance was significantly higher in Brazil than in Japan, Japan may have a greater EPG in MID practice. Specific characteristics of Japanese and Brazilian dentists showed significant associations with overall concordance.

Causes of the Evidence-practice Gap and Its Association with the Effects of Minimal Intervention Dentistry Education to Clinicians.

OBJECTIVES: To identify causes of the evidence-practice gap (EPG) in dentistry in Japan and analyze whether these causes are associated with: (a) improvement of EPG in minimal intervention dentistry (MID) following an educational intervention and (b) specific dentist characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods questionnaire survey among 197 Japanese dentists that integrated both quantitative and qualitative data. Causative factors for the EPG identified in the quantitative survey were clarified by qualitative analysis. We measured the EPG in a baseline survey using an EPG measurement tool based on MID. To examine how feedback using the latest scientific evidence affected change in the EPG, we measured the EPG again immediately after feedback was provided to participating dentists. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis classified all dentists into one of four "EPG cause" groups, namely "evidence-", "dentist-", "patient-", and "health insurance system-related" causes. Quantitative analysis confirmed that improvement in the EPG following the feedback intervention was indeed associated with group classification. The highest concordance was found for the "evidence-related" group while the lowest concordance was in the "dentist-related" group (p=0.004). Concordance improved after evidence feedback in all groups but was lowest in the "dentist-related" group. More dentists reported practice busyness in the "dentist-related" group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we identified four groups of causes of EPG among Japanese dentists. The degree of concordance between evidence and clinical practice was the lowest in the "dentist-related" group, and the results of this study are expected to provide useful information for the development of intervention methods for closing the EPG in the future.

Patient age and dentists' decisions about occlusal caries treatment thresholds.

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to 1) quantify dentists' treatment thresholds for occlusal primary caries; 2) determine if the patient's age affects dentists' decisions to surgically treat these carious lesions; and 3) test the hypothesis that patients', dentists', and practices' characteristics are significantly associated with surgical enamel intervention. METHODS: The study used a cross-sectional design consisting of a questionnaire survey in Japan. This study queried dentists working in outpatient dental practices who were affiliated with the Dental Practice-Based Research Network Japan (JDPBRN), which aims to allow dentists to investigate research questions and share experiences and expertise (n=282). Participants were asked whether they would surgically intervene in a series of cases depicting occlusal caries. Each case included a photograph of an occlusal surface displaying typical characteristics of caries penetration and written descriptions of adult and pediatric patients at high caries risk. RESULTS: In a case of a carious lesion within inner enamel, the proportion of dentists who indicated surgical intervention was significantly higher in adult patients (48%) when compared with pediatric patients (34%; p<0.01). Logistic regression analysis showed that using a dental explorer for the diagnosis of primary occlusal caries, type of practice, practice busyness, and percentage of patients who self-pay were significantly associated with dentists' decisions to intervene surgically into the inner enamel carious lesion. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that more than one-third of participants chose to intervene surgically into inner enamel carious lesions, and patients' age affects dentists' decisions about when to intervene surgically (clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT01680848).

Restorative treatment thresholds for proximal caries in dental PBRN.

This study was conducted to assess caries treatment thresholds among Japanese dentists and to identify characteristics associated with their decision to intervene surgically in proximal caries lesions within the enamel. Participants (n = 189) were shown radiographic images depicting interproximal caries and asked to indicate the lesion depth at which they would surgically intervene in both high- and low-caries-risk scenarios. Differences in treatment thresholds were then assessed via chi-square tests, and associations between the decision to intervene and dentist, practice, and patient characteristics were analyzed via logistic regression. The proportion of dentists who indicated surgical intervention into enamel was significantly higher in the high-caries-risk scenario (73.8%, N = 138) than in the low-caries-risk scenario (46.5%, N = 87) (p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses for a high-caries-risk scenario, gender of dentist, city population, type of practice, conducting caries-risk assessment, and administering diet counseling were significant factors associated with surgical enamel intervention. However, for a low-caries-risk scenario, city population, type of practice, and use of a dental explorer were the factors significantly associated with surgical enamel intervention. These findings demonstrate that restorative treatment thresholds for interproximal primary caries differ by caries risk. Most participants would restore lesions within the enamel for high-caries-risk individuals.

Application of self-efficacy theory in dental clinical practice.

In clinical practice, self-efficacy refers to how certain a patient feels about his or her ability to take the necessary action to improve the indicators and maintenance of health. It is assumed that the prognosis for patient behaviour can be improved by assessing the proficiency of their self-efficacy through providing psychoeducational instructions adapted for individual patients, and promoting behavioural change for self-care. Therefore, accurate assessment of self-efficacy is an important key in daily clinical preventive care. The previous research showed that the self-efficacy scale scores predicted patient behaviour in periodontal patients and mother's behaviour in paediatric dental practice. Self-efficacy belief is constructed from four principal sources of information: enactive mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological and affective states. Thus, self-efficacy can be enhanced by the intervention exploiting these sources. The previous studies revealed that behavioural interventions to enhance self-efficacy improved oral-care behaviour of patients. Therefore, assessment and enhancement of oral-care specific self-efficacy is important to promote behaviour modification in clinical dental practice. However, more researches are needed to evaluate the suitability of the intervention method.