Search

Background. A questionable occlusal caries (QOC) lesion can be defined as an occlusal surface with no radiographic evidence of caries, but caries is suspected because of clinical appearance. In this study, the authors report the results of a 20-month follow-up of these lesions. Methods. Fifty-three clinicians from The National Dental Practice- Based Research Network participated in this study, recording lesion characteristics at baseline and lesion status at 20 months. Results. At baseline, 1,341 QOC lesions were examined; the treatment that was planned for 1,033 of those at baseline was monitoring (oral hygiene instruction, applying or prescribing fluoride or varnish, or both), and the remaining 308 received a sealant (n = 192) or invasive therapy (n = 116). At the 20-month visit, clinicians continued to monitor 927 (90 percent) of the 1,033 monitored lesions. Clinicians decided to seal 61 (6 percent) of the 1,033 lesions (mean follow-up, 19 months) and invasively treat 45 (4 percent) of them (mean follow-up, 15 months). Young patient age (< 18 years) (odds ratio = 3.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.7-6.8) and the lesion’s being on a molar (odds ratio = 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.3-2.6) were associated with the clinicians deciding at some point after follow-up to seal the lesion or treat it invasively. Conclusions. Almost all (90 percent) QOC lesions for which the treatment planned at baseline was monitoring still were planned to undergo monitoring after 20 months. This finding suggests that noninvasive management is appropriate for these lesions. Practical Implications. Previous study results from baseline indicated a high prevalence of QOC lesions (34 percent). Clinicians should consider long-term monitoring when making treatment decisions about these lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To better understand the effectiveness of xylitol in caries prevention in adults and to attempt improved clinical trial efficiency. Methods As part of the Xylitol for Adult Caries Trial (X- ACT), non cavitated and cavitated caries lesions were assessed in subjects who were experiencing the disease. The trial was a test of the effectiveness of 5 g/day of xylitol, consumed by dissolving in the mouth five 1 g lozenges spaced across each day, compared with a sucralose placebo. For this analysis, seeking trial efficiency, 538 subjects aged 21-80, with complete data for four dental examinations, were selected from the 691 randomized into the 3-year trial, conducted at three sites. Acceptable inter- and intra-examiner reliability before and during the trial was quantified using the kappa statistic. Results The mean annualized noncavitated plus cavitated lesion transition scores in coronal and root surfaces, from sound to carious favoured xylitol over placebo, during the three cumulative periods of 12, 24, and 33 months, but these clinically and statistically nonsignificant differences declined in magnitude over time. Restricting the present assessment to those subjects with a higher baseline lifetime caries experience showed possible but inconsistent benefit. Conclusions There was no clear and clinically relevant preventive effect of xylitol on caries in adults with adequate fluoride exposure when non cavitated plus cavitated lesions were assessed. This conformed to the X- ACT trial result assessing cavitated lesions. Including non cavitated lesion assessment in this full-scale, placebo-controlled, multisite, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial in adults experiencing dental caries did not achieve added trial efficiency or demonstrate practical benefit of xylitol. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT00393055. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Questionable occlusal caries (QOC) can be defined as clinically suspected caries with no cavitation or radiographie evidence of occlusal caries. To the authors' knowledge, no one has quantified the prevalence of QOC, so this quantification was the authors' objective in conducting this study. Methods. A total of 82 dentist and hygienist practitioner-investigators (P-Is) from the United States and Denmark in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) participated. When patients seeking treatment had at least one unrestored occlusal surface, P-Is quantified their number of unrestored occlusal surfaces and instances of QOC, if applicable. P-Is also recorded information about characteristics of patients who had QOC and had provided informed consent. The authors adjusted for patient clustering within practices. Results. Overall, 6,910 patients had at least one unrestored occlusal surface, with a total of 50,445 unrestored surfaces. Thirty-four percent of all patients and 11 percent of unrestored occlusal tooth surfaces among all patients had QOC. Patient- and surface-level QOC prevalences varied significantly according to DPBRN region (P < .001 and P = .03, respectively). The highest percentages for patient- and surface-level prevalence occurred in Florida and Georgia (42 percent and 16 percent, respectively). Conclusions. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study in which investigators have quantified the prevalence of QOC in routine clinical practice. These results document a high prevalence overall, with wide variation in prevalence among The DPBRN's five main regions. Clinical Implications. QOC is common in routine practice and warrants further investigation regarding how best to manage it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the study that examines the materials used by dentists in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) in putting the first restoration on permanent posterior tooth surfaces. A cross-sectional study was conducted by DPBRN practitioner-investigators and informed consent was sought to patients. The study indicates that amalgam was more often used by practitioner-investigators than direct resin-based composite (RBC) for posterior carious lesions.

As the number of dental-related randomized clinical trials (RCTs) increases, there is a need for literature to help investigators inexperienced in conducting RCTs design and implement studies. This commentary describes four 'lessons learned' or considerations important in the planning and initial implementation of RCTs in dentistry that, to our knowledge, have not been discussed in the general dental literature describing trial techniques. These considerations are a) preparing or securing a thorough systematic review; b) developing a comprehensive set of study documents; c) designing and testing multiple recruitment strategies; and d) employing a run-in period prior to enrollment. Attention to these considerations in the planning phases of a dental RCT can help ensure that the trial is clinically relevant while also maximizing the likelihood that its implementation will be successful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

General dentists (GDs) have the opportunity to examine their patients for oral premalignancy/malignancy. We estimated the annualized per dentist number of oral lesions suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy discovered by United States (U.S.) general dentists and the annualized per dentist number of histologically-confirmed cancers subsequently diagnosed. Eligible participants were licensed, clinically-active U.S. GDs who were members of the U.S. National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. An a priori sample size of 900 was determined; 2000 GDs were invited to participate; 1,073 completed the study. Self-reported, cross-sectional data were obtained via an online questionnaire during 4/12/2017-8/31/2017 and analyzed. The reported numbers of suspicious oral lesions and histologically-confirmed oral cancer cases diagnosed over the previous six months were quantified. Potential outcome predictors were evaluated as covariates in multivariable analyses. Crude and adjusted statistics were produced by regressing each outcome on each independent variable while assuming a Poisson distribution, log link and utilizing robust standard errors. Eighty-seven percent of dentists reported discovering 1+ lesion suspicious for oral premalignancy/malignancy during the preceding six months. The mean number of suspicious lesions/dentist/year was 9.5; adjusted mean: 9.6. Fifteen percent of participants reported discovering 1+ lesion confirmed as cancer during the same period, 213 confirmed cancer cases/6 months or 426/year. Crude and adjusted mean numbers of histologically-confirmed oral cancers were both 0.4 cancers/dentist/year. Our findings suggest that many U.S. general dentists are actively identifying oral lesions suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy, thereby aiding in the discovery of oral malignancies and representing an important component in the frontline against cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Following a successful 2005-2012 phase with three regional practice-based research networks (PBRNs), a single, unified national network called ''The National Dental PBRN'' was created in 2012 in the United States to improve oral health by conducting practice-based research and serving dental professionals through education and collegiality. Methods: Central administration is based in Alabama. Regional centres are based in Alabama, Florida, Minnesota, Oregon, New York and Texas, with a Coordinating Centre in Maryland. Ideas for studies are prioritized by the Executive Committee, comprised mostly of full-time clinicians. Results: To date, 2763 persons have enrolled, from all six network regions; enrollment continues to expand. They represent a broad range of practitioners, practice types, and patient populations. Practitioners are actively improving every step of the research process, from idea generation, to study development, field testing, data collection, and presentation and publication. Conclusions: Practitioners from diverse settings are partnering with fellow practitioners and academics to improve clinical practice and meet the needs of clinicians and their patients. Clinical significance: This ''nation's network'' aims to serve as a precious national resource to improve the scientific basis for clinical decision-making and foster movement of the latest evidence into routine practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]