Association between unmet dental needs and school absenteeism because of illness or injury among U.S. school children and adolescents aged 6-17 years, 2011-2012

BACKGROUND : We assessed the prevalence of dental disease among U.S. children and adolescents aged 6–17 years, as well as the impact of unmet dental needs on school absenteeism because of illness/injury within the past 12 months. METHODS : Data were from the 2011/2012 National Survey of Children's Health (n = 65,680). Unmet dental need was defined as lack of access to appropriate and timely preventive or therapeutic dental healthcare when needed within the past 12 months. The impact of unmet dental needs on school absenteeism was measured using a multivariate generalized linear model with Poisson probability distribution (p b 0.05). RESULTS : Within the past 12 months, 21.8% (10.8 million) of all U.S. children and adolescents aged 6–17 years had “a toothache, decayed teeth, or unfilled cavities.” Of all U.S. children and adolescents aged 6–17 years, 15.8% (7.8 million) reported any unmet dental need (i.e., preventive and/or therapeutic dental need)within the past 12 months. The mean number of days of school absence because of illness/injury was higher among students with an unmet therapeutic dental need in the presence of a dental condition compared to those reporting no unmet dental need (β=0.25; p b 0.001). CONCLUSIONS : Enhanced and sustained efforts are needed to increase access to dental services among underserved U.S. children and adolescents.http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ypmed2016-03-31hb201

Caries risk documentation and prevention : eMeasures for dental electronic health records

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal patient level dataavailable in the electronic health record (EHR)allows for the development, implementation, and validations of dental quality measures (eMeasures). Objective We report the feasibility and validity of implementing two eMeasures. The eMeasures determined the proportion of patients receiving a caries risk assessment (eCRA) and corresponding appropriate risk-based preventative treatments for patients at elevated risk of caries (appropriateness of care [eAoC]) in two academic institutions and one accountable care organization, in the 2019 reporting year. METHODS: Both eMeasures define the numerator and denominator beginning at the patient level, populations’ specifications, and validated the automated queries. For eCRA, patients who completed a comprehensive or periodic oral evaluation formed the denominator, and patients of any age who received a CRA formed the numerator. The eAoC evaluated the proportion of patients at elevated caries risk who received the corresponding appropriate risk-based preventative treatments. RESULTS: EHR automated queries identified in three sites 269,536 patients who met the inclusion criteria for receiving a CRA. The overall proportion of patients who received a CRA was 94.4% (eCRA). In eAoC, patients at elevated caries risk levels (moderate, high, or extreme) received fluoride preventive treatment ranging from 56 to 93.8%. For patients at high and extreme risk, antimicrobials were prescribed more frequently site 3 (80.6%) than sites 2 (16.7%) and 1 (2.9%). CONCLUSION: Patient-level data available in the EHRs can be used to implement process-ofcare dental eCRA and AoC, eAoC measures identify gaps in clinical practice. EHR-based measures can be useful in improving delivery of evidence-based preventative treatments to reduce risk, prevent tooth decay, and improve oral health.U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research.http://www.thieme.com/books-main/clinical-informatics/product/4433-aci-applied-clinical-informaticsDental Management Science

Lessons learned from dental patient safety case reports.

BackgroundErrors are commonplace in health care, including dentistry. It is imperative for dental professionals to intercept errors before they lead to an adverse event and to mitigate their effects when an adverse event occurs. This requires a systematic approach at both the profession level, encapsulated in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's patient safety initiative framework, as well as at the practice level, in which crew resource management is a tested paradigm. Supporting patient safety at both the profession and dental practice levels relies on understanding the types and causes of errors, which have not been well studied.MethodsThe authors performed a retrospective review of dental adverse events reported in the literature. Electronic bibliographic databases were searched, and data were extracted on background characteristics, incident description, case characteristics, clinic setting where adverse event originated, phase of patient care that adverse event was detected, proximal cause, type of patient harm, degree of harm, and recovery actions.ResultsThe authors identified 182 publications (containing 270 cases) through their search. Delayed treatment, unnecessary treatment, or disease progression after misdiagnosis was the largest type of harm reported. Of the reviewed cases, 24.4% of those patients involved in an adverse event experienced permanent harm. One of every 10 case reports reviewed (11.1%) reported that the adverse event resulted in the death of the affected patient.ConclusionsPublished case reports provide a window into understanding the nature and extent of dental adverse events; however, the overall dearth of publications on adverse events in the dental literature points to the need for more study.Practical implicationsSiloed and incomplete contributions to dentistry's understanding of adverse events in the dental office are threats to dental patients' safety. Publishing more, and more comprehensive, case reports on adverse events is recommended for dental practitioners

Unintended consequences and challenges of quality measurements in dentistry.

BACKGROUND:In recent years, several state dental programs, researchers and the Dental Quality Alliance (DQA) have sought to develop baseline quality measures for dentistry as a way to improve health outcomes, reduce costs and enhance patient experiences. Some of these measures have been tested and validated for various population groups. However, there are some unintended consequences and challenges with quality measurement in dentistry as observed from our previous work on refining and transforming dental quality measures into e-measures. MAIN BODY:Some examples of the unintended consequences and challenges associated with implementing dental quality measures include: a de-emphasis on patient-centeredness with process-based quality measures, an incentivization of unethical behavior due to fee-for-service reimbursement systems, the risk of compromising patient and provider autonomy with plan-level measures, a disproportionate benefits of dental quality measurement going toward payers, and the risk of alienating smaller dental offices due to the resource-intensive nature of quality measurement. CONCLUSION:As our medical counterparts have embraced quality measurement for improved health outcomes, so too must the dental profession. Our ultimate goal is to ensure the delivery of high quality, patient-centered dental care and effective quality measurement is the first step. By continuously monitoring the performance of dental quality measures and their continued refinement when unintended consequences are observed, we can improve patient and population health outcomes

Unintended consequences and challenges of quality measurements in dentistry

Abstract Background In recent years, several state dental programs, researchers and the Dental Quality Alliance (DQA) have sought to develop baseline quality measures for dentistry as a way to improve health outcomes, reduce costs and enhance patient experiences. Some of these measures have been tested and validated for various population groups. However, there are some unintended consequences and challenges with quality measurement in dentistry as observed from our previous work on refining and transforming dental quality measures into e-measures. Main body Some examples of the unintended consequences and challenges associated with implementing dental quality measures include: a de-emphasis on patient-centeredness with process-based quality measures, an incentivization of unethical behavior due to fee-for-service reimbursement systems, the risk of compromising patient and provider autonomy with plan-level measures, a disproportionate benefits of dental quality measurement going toward payers, and the risk of alienating smaller dental offices due to the resource-intensive nature of quality measurement. Conclusion As our medical counterparts have embraced quality measurement for improved health outcomes, so too must the dental profession. Our ultimate goal is to ensure the delivery of high quality, patient-centered dental care and effective quality measurement is the first step. By continuously monitoring the performance of dental quality measures and their continued refinement when unintended consequences are observed, we can improve patient and population health outcomes

Development of an inventory of dental harms : methods and rationale

OBJECTIVES : While adverse events (AEs) are all too prevalent, their underlying causes are difficult to assess because they are often multifactorial. Standardizing the language of dental AEs is an important first step toward increasing patient safety for the dental patient. METHODS : We followed a multimodal approach building a dental AE inventory, which included a literature review; review of the MAUDE database; a cross-sectional, self-administered patient survey; focus groups; interviews with providers and domain experts; and chart reviews. RESULTS : One hundred eight unique allergy/toxicity/foreign body response, 70 aspiration/ingestion of foreign body, 70 infection, 52 wrong site/wrong patient/wrong procedure, 23 bleeding, 48 pain, 149 hard tissue injury, 127 soft tissue injury, 91 nerve injury, 171 other systemic complication, and 177 other orofacial complication were identified. Subtype AEs within the categories revealed that allergic reaction, aspiration, pain, and wrong procedure were the most common AEs identified among known (i.e., chart reviews) and hypothetical (i.e., interviews) sources. CONCLUSIONS : Using a multimodal approach, a broad list of dental AEs was developed, in which the AEs were classed into 12 categories. Hard tissue injury was noted frequently during interviews and in actuality. Pain was the unexpected AE that was consistently identified with every modality used. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS : Most AEs result in temporary harm with hard tissue injury being a common AE identified through interviews and in actuality through chart reviews. Acknowledging that AEs happen is an important step toward mitigating them and assuring quality of care for our patients.The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research.http://www.journalpatientsafety.com2023-09-01hj2023Dental Management Science