Dental science--reality of the evidence

Feasibility of assessing training of primary care dental practitioners in endodontics of moderate complexity: mapping process and learning

Objectives

To explore the feasibility of measuring quality of endodontic care provided by general dental practitioners (GDPs), using clinical, radiographic and patient-related outcomes, as well as understanding practitioner views and estimating financial costs.

Methods

Multi-faceted mixed-methods two-part study involving retrospective analysis of the educational component (course assessments, endodontic training blocks and analysis of a sample of teeth treated at the beginning and end of training), and prospective analysis of patients treated by these dentists after completion of training.

Participant

Dentists working in and patients treated in primary dental care in London.

Intervention

Twenty-four-month training in endodontics.

Comparison

Dentists enrolled in the training at different time points.

Outcome

Measuring outcome of endodontic treatment.

Results

Eight dentists (mean 36 years, SD = 8.2 years) participated in training. Subsequently, five of these dentists (mean 34.2 years, SD = 7.08 years) contributed to the prospective study and recruited 135 patients. Thirty-five patients completed all patient-related outcome questionnaires, and of these there were 16 cases with complete clinical and radiographic data (12%) at follow-up (10.1–36.4 months). Preliminary analysis revealed that a minimum of 45 cases of complete data would be required for multivariate analysis, requiring the recruitment of in excess of 375 patients to future studies to account for this level of loss to follow-up.

Conclusions

Findings suggest it is possible to carry out mixed-methods and treatment-related outcome-based research in primary care. Measurement/data capture tools developed were tested and used successfully in measuring the adherence to treatment processes and outcome of endodontic treatment.

Clinical trials in dental primary care: what research methods have been used to produce reliable evidence?

OBJECTIVE

To identify controlled clinical trials done exclusively in dental primary care and to classify the research according to design. Details of any procedures used to recruit general dental practitioners and any special organisational arrangements were also collected.

DESIGN

A scoping literature review.

SETTING

Dental primary care defined as general dental practice, community and school dental settings.

PARTICIPANTS

Published randomised controlled trials using randomised or quasi randomised approaches and controlled clinical trials were considered for inclusion in the review. Reports were excluded if they did not describe either a randomised controlled trial or a controlled trial. Studies were excluded if the setting was not primary dental care or the intervention was for non-dental conditions. Conference abstracts without a full report and trials published in a language other than English were also excluded.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Experimental and quasi-experimental designs, clinical areas and different kinds of strategies used to recruit dentists, any organisational arrangements made to support research in dental primary care.

RESULTS

The search of the Cochrane Oral Health Group Controlled Trials Register found 174 articles. Forty-three randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Trials to evaluate the effects of interventions for types of anaesthesia, periodontal diseases, smoking cessation techniques, dental materials, organisational aspects of dental care, patient anxiety, post extraction healing rates, antibiotics were identified. All were done in general dental practice. Trials in school and community settings were also included.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice-based research needs to be encouraged to provide dental primary care with relevant evidence upon which effective treatment can be based. This review shows there are few trials done in dental primary care to inform clinical practice, most of which have been reported since 1997. The range of trial designs shows that this method of evaluation can be used to evaluate dental primary care interventions and this is promising for those with an interest in improving dental patient outcomes. More research on how to recruit dentists into clinical trial research must be done.