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.

Dental practice-based research networks (D-PBRN) worldwide: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

For more than twenty years, dental practice-based research networks (D-PBRN) have helped to structure clinical research in private practice. They bring together practitioners working in several structures and may include a greater number of subjects. The aims of this study were thus to systematically explore the scientific production from dental private practices in general and to map and describe the D-PBRN activity worldwide.

DATA SOURCES

Two research procedures were carried out in parallel. The first was conducted as a scoping review to examine peer-reviewed literature indexed in the PubMed database and the second was performed on the World Wide Web to identify the main characteristics of the networks (location, scientific production…).

STUDY SELECTION

368 publications were identified among which 202 were published by PBRN members and the others by private practitioners not affiliated to any network. 210 (57 % of the included articles) were produced in the USA. A higher number of diverse centers are involved in each study when it is conducted by a PBRN (59.06 ± 66.59 vs. 13.51 ± 31.58 for networks and independent teams, respectively; p < 0.01). 24 D-PBRN were identified, a majority being based in the USA and 8 in Europe.

CONCLUSIONS

Although dental practice-based research has grown over the years, the number of D-PBRN worldwide remains low. Even if it requires some investment to produce research in dental offices, this type of networks helps to fill the gap between private practice and research and to improve knowledge on oral health.

RELEVANCE

The mapping of all the dental PBRN together with the research topics studied throughout the world make the relevance of this article. The ways to improve practice-based research in dentistry are also discussed in the paper.