USING DENTAL PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES (dPROs) IN META-ANALYSES: A SCOPING REVIEW AND METHODOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION

Patient-reported outcomes following treatment of peri‑implant disease: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Despite many studies on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in peri‑implantitis treatment, a comprehensive review is lacking. This systematic analysis aimed to evaluate PROs after surgical and nonsurgical treatments, with a focus on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

METHODS

This systematic review followed PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines, using the PICO framework to define eligibility: adults (≥18) needing peri‑implantitis treatment (non-surgical or surgical) with outcomes on patient satisfaction, quality of life, or other PROs. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024585132).

SOURCES

Systematic search was conducted in Cochrane Library, OVID Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar, and complemented by manual search.

STUDY SELECTION

Of the 5339 publications identified, 1674 titles and abstracts were screened, resulting in 25 full-text reviews. After resolving disagreements, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. No significant differences were observed in the PROs before and after the nonsurgical treatments. Long-term PROs assessments (≥12 months) showed no significant differences among different surgical procedures. However, in the short term, three studies found that patients who received guided bone regeneration (GBR) experienced significantly higher pain and discomfort than did the controls (p < 0.05). In addition, one study reported a significant association between background characteristics (sex and employment) and the level of pain/discomfort following surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in PROs were found between non-surgical and long-term surgical treatments before and after intervention. However, short-term data showed more pain with resorbable membranes in GBR procedures. The absence of validated PROMs for peri‑implantitis highlights the need for better tools to capture patient preferences.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This study highlights the variability in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following nonsurgical and surgical periodontal treatments. While long-term outcomes showed no significant differences, short-term results suggest greater pain and discomfort with GBR surgery using resorbable membranes. Understanding these differences can help clinicians optimize treatment planning and patient counseling.

DENTAL PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES UPDATE 2023

The emergence and rapid development of disruptive innovations are quickly turning our profession into personalized dentistry, built upon evidence-based, data-oriented, and patient-centered research. In order to help improve the quality and quantity of patient-centered evidence in dentistry, further promote the wide and standard use of dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) and dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs), the Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice has put together this special issue, the third of a series entitled Dental Patient-Reported Outcomes Update. A total of 7 solicited articles are collected in this issue. To put them into a broader perspective, this review provides a concise summary of key, selected PRO and dPRO articles published during 2023. A brief introduction to those articles included in this Special Issue follows. Four main domains are covered in this Special Issue: (1) dPROs and digital dentistry, (2) standardization of dPRO-related methodology, (3) current usage of dPROs and dPROMs in published research, and (iv) the significance and relevance of dPRO usage.

OHIP-5 FOR SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN

BACKGROUND

Different dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) exist for children and adults, leading to an incompatibility in outcome assessment in these 2 age groups. However, the dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact are the same in the 2 groups, providing an opportunity for compatible dPRO assessment if dPROMs were identical. Therefore, we adapted the 5-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-5), a recommended dPROM for adults, to school-aged children to allow a standardized dPRO assessment in individuals aged 7 years and above.

AIM

It was the aim of this study to develop a 5-item OHIP for school-aged children (OHIP-5School) and to investigate the instrument's score reliability and validity.

METHODS

German-speaking children (N = 95, mean age: 8.6 years +/- 1.3 years, 55% girls) from the Department of Pediatric Dentistry at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria and a private dental practice in Bergisch Gladbach, Germany participated. The original OHIP-5 was modified and adapted for school going children aged 7-13 years and this modified version was termed OHIP-5School. It's score reliability was studied by determining scores' internal consistency and temporal stability by calculating Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients, respectively. Construct validity was assessed comparing OHIP-5School scores with OHIP-5 as well as Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ-G8-10) scores.

RESULTS

Score reliability for the OHIP-5School was "good" (Cronbach's alpha: 0.81) or "excellent" (Intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.92). High correlations between OHIP-5School, OHIP-5, and CPQ-G8-10 scores were observed and hypotheses about a pattern of these correlations were confirmed, providing evidence for score validity.

CONCLUSION

The OHIP-5School and the original OHIP-5 are short and psychometrically sound instruments to measure the oral health related quality of life in school-aged children, providing an opportunity for a standardized oral health impact assessment with the same metric in school-aged children, adolescents, and adults.

THE EFFECT DIRECTION SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN ASSESSING SMALL-STUDY EFFECTS

OBJECTIVE

Studies with statistically significant results are frequently more likely to be published than those with non-significant results. This phenomenon leads to publication bias or small-study effects and can seriously affect the validity of the conclusion from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Small-study effects typically appear in a specific direction, depending on whether the outcome of interest is beneficial or harmful, but this direction is rarely taken into account in conventional methods.

METHODS

We propose to use directional tests to assess potential small-study effects. The tests are built on a one-sided testing framework based on the existing Egger's regression test. We performed simulation studies to compare the proposed one-sided regression tests, conventional two-sided regression tests, as well as two other competitive methods (Begg's rank test and the trim-and-fill method). Their performance was measured by type I error rates and statistical power. Three real-world meta-analyses on measurements of infrabony periodontal defects were also used to examine the various methods' performance.

RESULTS

Based on simulation studies, the one-sided tests could have considerably higher statistical power than competing methods, particularly their two-sided counterparts. Their type I error rates were generally controlled well. In the case study of the three real-world meta-analyses, by accounting for the favored direction of effects, the one-sided tests could rule out potential false-positive conclusions about small-study effects. They also are more powerful in assessing small-study effects than the conventional two-sided tests when true small-study effects likely exist.

CONCLUSION

We recommend researchers incorporate the potential favored direction of effects into the assessment of small-study effects.

DENTAL PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES IN ENDODONTICS - A NARRATIVE REVIEW

Recently in oral health care settings, the focus of assessing treatment outcomes has shifted from the perspective of the clinician towards that of the patient. Endodontology is a specialty of dentistry concerned with the prevention and treatment of pulp and periapical diseases. Research in endodontology and its associated treatment outcomes have focused mainly on clinician-reported outcomes (CROs) and not dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs). As a result, there is a need to emphasize the importance and relevance of dPROs to researchers and clinicians. The aim of this review is to present an overview of dPROs and dPROMs within endodontics in an attempt to create a better understanding of the patient experience, highlight the need to place the patient at the center of treatment, enhance patient care and encourage more research into dPROs. The key dPROs following endodontic treatment include pain, tenderness, tooth function, need for further intervention, adverse effects (exacerbation of symptoms, tooth discoloration) and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life. dPROs are important following endodontic treatment because they assist clinicians and patients when they discuss and select the most appropriate management options, help clinicians make decisions on pre-operative assessment, prevention and treatment, and improve the methodology and design of future clinical studies. Clinicians and researchers in endodontology should prioritize patient welfare and undertake routine analyses of dPROs using appropriate and robust measures. Due to the lack of agreement over the reporting and definition of endodontic treatment outcomes, a comprehensive project to define a ``Core Outcome Set for Endodontic Treatment Methods (COSET)'' is currently ongoing. In the future, a new and exclusive assessment tool should be developed to reflect the viewpoints of patients receiving endodontic treatment more accurately.

A Bibliometric Mapping Study of the Literature on Oral Health-related Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

Oral health is an indispensable component of overall health, and oral health status significantly influences people's physical, mental, and social well-being. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), an important and widely used dental patient-reported outcome (dPRO), is attracting more and more researchers' attention and interest. This study aimed to analyze and map the existing scientific literature regarding OHRQoL through a bibliometric approach, including a summary of the characteristics of OHRQoL-related publications, the identification of prolific entities, high-frequency keywords analysis, and research trend analysis via periodic high-impact keywords.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in the Web of Science Core Collection to collect OHRQoL-related original research and review articles. After examination and deduplication, the following bibliometric information was extracted from each article: title, abstract, keywords, authors, affiliations, geographic origin (countries/regions), year of publication, journal name, and references. Various scientometric mapping tools including Microsoft Office spreadsheet, VOSviewer, Biblioshiny R-package software, and Scimago Graphica were used to analyze basic bibliometric parameters, leading producers, high-impact keywords, and research trends.

RESULTS

A total of 3324 OHRQoL-related articles (3119 original research articles and 205 review papers) were collected, which received 65,704 citations. A total of 9950 authors from 2429 organizations contributed to this body of research. Prolific authors from Europe, USA, Brazil, New Zealand, China, and Canada were identified, and they also centered collaboration clusters in the co-author network. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology was the most prolific journal. Twenty-one keywords with more than 200 occurrences, and 23 keywords with more than 150 occurrences, were identified for publications of 1994-2021 and 2012-2021, respectively. Keyword analysis revealed hot topics such as instrument development and validation, studies targeting children and adolescents, as well as clinical studies in operative dentistry, implantology, orthodontics, and community dentistry. Oral Health Impact Profile is the most commonly used instrument in OHRQoL-related research.

CONCLUSIONS

OHRQoL is an impactful topic in dental health care as it is not only useful in dental research and patient-centered clinical outcome measures but also provides valuable guidance in dental public health administration and policy making. OHRQoL-related research presents a dynamic landscape and is expected to continue presenting high productivity and broad application in the future.

An Observational Study on Oral Health and Quality of Life for RPD Wearers in the N-E Region of Romania

There is a lack of information regarding the oral health of the elderly population in Romania; only a few articles have been published about their edentulism, and there are no official data regarding the oral health, OHRQoL, and prosthodontic status of this population. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between the essential functional qualities of removable partial dentures (RPD) and participants’ oral-health-related wellbeing among an edentulous population from the N-E region in Romania using the OHIP-5-questionnaire. In total, 546 patients from Gr. T. Popa Iasi University were enrolled after following a set of sorting procedures. We used the Kruskal–Wallis test and the Mann–Whitney test to determine whether there were significant differences between the various groups of patients. For questions 1, 2, 3, and 5 of the OHIP, the null hypothesis was rejected, as there were statistically significant differences between the three groups. This study was limited to a specific group. However, it can provide an insight into RPD patients’ happiness when treated in an academic environment.