Assessing use of a standardized dental diagnostic terminology in an electronic health record.

Although standardized terminologies such as the International Classification of Diseases have been in use in medicine for over a century, efforts in the dental profession to standardize dental diagnostic terms have not achieved widespread acceptance. To address this gap, a standardized dental diagnostic terminology, the EZCodes, was developed in 2009. Fifteen dental education institutions in the United States and Europe have implemented the EZCodes dental diagnostic terminology. This article reports on the utilization and valid entry of the EZCodes at three of the dental schools that have adopted this standardized dental diagnostic terminology. Electronic data on the use of procedure codes with diagnostic terms from the three schools over a period from July 2010 to June 2011 were aggregated. The diagnostic term and procedure code pairs were adjudicated by three calibrated dentists. Analyses were conducted to gain insight into the utilization and valid entry of the EZCodes diagnostic terminology in the one-year period. Error proportions in the entry of diagnostic term (and by diagnostic category) were also computed. In the twelve-month period, 29,965 diagnostic terms and 249,411 procedure codes were entered at the three institutions resulting in a utilization proportion of 12 percent. Caries and periodontics were the most frequently used categories. More than 1,000 of the available 1,321 diagnostic terms were never used. Overall, 60.5 percent of the EZCodes entries were found to be valid. The results demonstrate low utilization of EZCodes in an electronic health record and raise the need for specific training of dental providers on the importance of using dental diagnostic terminology and specifically how to use the terms in the electronic record. These findings will serve to increase the use/correct use of the EZCodes dental diagnostic terminology and ultimately create a reliable platform for undertaking clinical, outcomes, and quality improvement-related research.

Detection and characterization of usability problems in structured data entry interfaces in dentistry.

BACKGROUND: Poor usability is one of the major barriers for optimally using electronic health records (EHRs). Dentists are increasingly adopting EHRs, and are using structured data entry interfaces to enter data such that the data can be easily retrieved and exchanged. Until recently, dentists have lacked a standardized terminology to consistently represent oral health diagnoses. OBJECTIVES: In this study we evaluated the usability of a widely used EHR interface that allow the entry of diagnostic terms, using multi-faceted methods to identify problems and work with the vendor to correct them using an iterative design method. METHODS: Fieldwork was undertaken at two clinical sites, and dental providers as subjects participated in user testing (n=32), interviews (n=36) and observations (n=24). RESULTS: User testing revealed that only 22-41% of users were able to successfully complete a simple task of entering one diagnosis, while no user was able to complete a more complex task. We identified and characterized 24 high-level usability problems reducing efficiency and causing user errors. Interface-related problems included unexpected approaches for displaying diagnosis, lack of visibility, and inconsistent use of UI widgets. Terminology related issues included missing and mis-categorized concepts. Work domain issues involved both absent and superfluous functions. In collaboration with the vendor, each usability problem was prioritized and a timeline set to resolve the concerns. DISCUSSION: Mixed methods evaluations identified a number of critical usability issues relating to the user interface, underlying terminology of the work domain. The usability challenges were found to prevent most users from successfully completing the tasks. Our further work we will determine if changes to the interface, terminology and work domain do result in improved usability.

The development of a dental diagnostic terminology.

There is no commonly accepted standardized terminology for oral diagnoses. The purpose of this article is to report the development of a standardized dental diagnostic terminology by a work group of dental faculty members. The work group developed guiding principles for decision making and adhered to principles of terminology development. The members used an iterative process to develop a terminology incorporating concepts represented in the Toronto/University of California, San Francisco/Creighton University and International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 codes and periodontal and endodontic diagnoses. Domain experts were consulted to develop a final list of diagnostic terms. A structure was developed, consisting of thirteen categories, seventy-eight subcategories, and 1,158 diagnostic terms, hierarchically organized and mappable to other terminologies and ontologies. Use of this standardized diagnostic terminology will reinforce the diagnosis-treatment link and will facilitate clinical research, quality assurance, and patient communication. Future work will focus on implementation and approaches to enhance the validity and reliability of diagnostic term utilization.

Education of tobacco use prevention and cessation for dental professionals--a paradigm shift.

The use of tobacco continues to be a substantial risk factor in the development and progression of oral cancer, periodontitis, implant failure and poor wound healing. Dental and dental hygiene education providers have made great advances towards the incorporation of tobacco education into their curricula in recent years. Unfortunately, however, both medical and dental education research has consistently reported schools providing only basic knowledge-based curricula that rarely incorporate more effective, behaviourally-based components affecting long-term change. The limited training of oral healthcare students, at least in part, is reflected in practising dental professionals continuing to report offering incomplete tobacco interventions. In order to prepare the next generation of oral healthcare providers, this paper proposes a paradigm shift in how tobacco use prevention and cessation (TUPAC) may be incorporated into existing curricula. It is suggested that schools should carefully consider: to what level of competency should TUPAC be trained in dental and dental hygiene schools; the importance of establishing rapport through good communication skills; the core knowledge level for TUPAC; suggested instructional and assessment strategies; the importance of continuing professional education for the enhancement of TUPAC.

Consensus Report: 2nd European Workshop on Tobacco Use Prevention and Cessation for Oral Health Professionals.

Tobacco use has been identified as a major risk factor for oral disorders such as cancer and periodontal disease. Tobacco use cessation (TUC) is associated with the potential for reversal of precancer, enhanced outcomes following periodontal treatment, and better periodontal status compared to patients who continue to smoke. Consequently, helping tobacco users to quit has become a part of both the responsibility of oral health professionals and the general practice of dentistry. TUC should consist of behavioural support, and if accompanied by pharmacotherapy, is more likely to be successful. It is widely accepted that appropriate compensation of TUC counselling would give oral health professionals greater incentives to provide these measures. Therefore, TUC-related compensation should be made accessible to all dental professionals and be in appropriate relation to other therapeutic interventions. International and national associations for oral health professionals are urged to act as advocates to promote population, community and individual initiatives in support of tobacco use prevention and cessation (TUPAC) counselling, including integration in undergraduate and graduate dental curricula. In order to facilitate the adoption of TUPAC strategies by oral health professionals, we propose a level of care model which includes 1) basic care: brief interventions for all patients in the dental practice to identify tobacco users, assess readiness to quit, and request permission to re-address at a subsequent visit, 2) intermediate care: interventions consisting of (brief) motivational interviewing sessions to build on readiness to quit, enlist resources to support change, and to include cessation medications, and 3) advanced care: intensive interventions to develop a detailed quit plan including the use of suitable pharmacotherapy. To ensure that the delivery of effective TUC becomes part of standard care, continuing education courses and updates should be implemented and offered to all oral health professionals on a regular basis.

Assessing behavioural change support abilities of the oral healthcare team.

Competent behavioural change intervention can be learned, practised and developed. Therefore, the teaching and assessment of this ability should be within the scope of both the undergraduate and post-graduate curriculum. Assessment should target knowledge base and skills in the areas of counselling, communication and behaviour. Assessment of the knowledge base should ideally be conducted in a comprehensive, multidisciplinary, centrally based manner in the pre-clinical curriculum. Assessment of skills in the areas of communication, counselling and behaviour change is a wider aim that should be integral throughout the curriculum. In continuing education (CE) environments, an initial 'screening' assessment would help educators to adjust the course to the participants' background and needs. Furthermore, three major assessment schemes are proposed: (1) assessment of knowledge and skills, (2) evaluation of the whole course by the participants, and (3) assessment of the implementation process, four to six months after completion.