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

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

Treatment planning in dentistry using an electronic health record: implications for undergraduate education

Objective Treatment planning, an essential component of clinical practice, has received little attention in the dental literature and there appears to be no consistent format being followed in the teaching and development of treatment plans within dental school curricula. No investigation, to our knowledge, has been carried out to explore the subject of treatment planning since the advent of electronic health record (EHR) use in dentistry. It is therefore important to examine the topic of treatment planning in the context of EHRs. Methods This paper reports on how 25 predoctoral dental students from two U.S. schools performed when asked to complete diagnosis and treatment planning exercises for two clinical scenarios in an EHR. Three calibrated clinical teaching faculty scored diagnosis entry, diagnosis-treatment (procedure) pairing, and sequencing of treatment according to criteria taught in their curriculum. Scores were then converted to percent correct and reported as means (with standard deviations). Results Overall, the participants earned 48.2% of the possible points. Participants at School 2 earned a mean of 54.3% compared with participants at School 1, who earned 41.9%. Students fared better selecting the appropriate treatment (59.8%) compared with choosing the correct diagnoses (41.9%) but performed least favorably when organizing the sequence of their treatment plans (41.7%). Conclusion Our results highlight the need to improve the current process by which treatment planning is taught and also to consider the impact of technology on the fundamental skills of diagnosis and treatment planning within the modern educational setting

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 students 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