How to Bridge Research Results to Everyday Clinical Care?

EVIDENCE-PRACTICE GAP IN TREATMENT DECISIONS ABOUT DEFECTIVE COMPOSITE AND AMALGAM RESTORATIONS AMONG BRAZILIAN DENTISTS

Better understanding of dentists' decision-making about defective restorations is needed to close the evidence-practice gap (EPG). Aim: this study aimed to quantify the EPG about defective restorations and identify dentist factors associated with this EPG. Methods: 216 dentists from São Paulo State, Brazil, completed a questionnaire about three clinical case scenarios involving defective composite restorations with cementum-dentin margins (case 1) and enamel margins (case 2), and an amalgam (case 3) restoration. Dentists were asked what treatment, if any, they would recommend, including preventive treatment, polishing, re-surfacing, or repairing the restoration, or replacing the entire restoration. Replacing the entire restoration in any of these three scenarios was classified as inconsistent with the evidence, comprising an EPG. Bivariate analyses using Chi-square, ANOVA, or multiple comparison tests were performed (p<.05). Results: for defective composite restorations, 49% and 55% of dentists chose to replace the entire restoration for cases 1 and 2, respectively. Twenty-nine percent of dentists chose to replace the entire amalgam restoration. Dentists were significantly more likely to choose to replace the defective amalgam restoration than the composite restoration with a defect at the cementum-dentin margins or the enamel margins (both at p < .001). Female dentists were more likely to choose a conservative treatment than male dentists for cases 1 (p=.034) and 2 (p=.009). Dentists with a higher percentage of patients interested in individualized caries prevention were also more conservative in case 1 (p=.045). Conclusion: a substantial EPG regarding treatment decisions for defective restorations exists, especially for composite restorations. This study adds to the international evidence that an EPG exists in this clinical area and that global strategies need to be developed to close the gap.

Core functions and forms of Bright IDEAS: A multi-methods evaluation of the adoption of an evidence-based psychosocial training program through iterative adaptation

Background

Despite efforts to widely disseminate interventions designed to increase access to quality supportive care to pediatric cancer patients and their families, many of these interventions fail to meet expectations once deployed in real-life clinical settings. This study identifies the functions and forms of Bright IDEAS: Problem-Solving Skills Training, an evidence based psychosocial intervention for caregivers of children recently diagnosed with cancer, to identify pragmatic program adaptations in its real-world clinical implementation. We compare intervention adoption before and after adaptations to the Bright IDEAS training program as part of a national training program designed to disseminate the intervention.

Methods

209 pediatric psychosocial oncology practitioners representing 134 unique institutions were trained during 10 in-person 8-hour workshops (2015-2019). Functions and forms of Bright IDEAS were identified, and adaptations made to the training agenda and curriculum based on practitioner feedback following implementation in local institutions. Mixed method evaluation included longitudinal surveys at 6- and 12-months post training; and qualitative interviews among a subgroup of practitioners (N = 47) to understand and compare perspectives on intervention adoption and barriers to implementation before and after adaptations to the Bright IDEAS training program. The RE-AIM framework was used to guide dissemination evaluation.

Results

A total of four adaptations were tailored to the identified forms of the intervention: case studies; pre-training reading materials; training videos; and letters of institutional support from primary supervisor. Pre- and post-training adaptations to the Bright IDEAS training program were mapped to RE-AIM constructs. Quantitative findings demonstrate that adaptations appeared to improve adoption and usage overall.

Conclusion

This study provides insight into how contextual factors influence psychosocial practitioners' capacity to adopt, implement, and maintain Bright IDEAS in the clinical setting. This study demonstrates the use of real-time stakeholder feedback to guide intervention translation from research to practice settings.