评估正畸医生对外根尖吸收临床实践指南的使用情况

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 Dentistry Progress in Orthodontics Pub Date : 2024-04-22 DOI:10.1186/s40510-024-00515-5
Sebastiaan P. van Doornik, Marlotte B. M. Pijnenburg, Krista I. Janssen, Yijin Ren, Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman
{"title":"评估正畸医生对外根尖吸收临床实践指南的使用情况","authors":"Sebastiaan P. van Doornik, Marlotte B. M. Pijnenburg, Krista I. Janssen, Yijin Ren, Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman","doi":"10.1186/s40510-024-00515-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"External apical root resorption (EARR) is a frequently observed adverse event in patients undergoing fixed appliance therapy. Assessing the patients’ risk during treatment is important, as certain factors are assumed to be associated with an increased likelihood of occurrence. However, their predictive value remains limited, making evidence-based clinical decision-making challenging for orthodontists. To address this issue, the Dutch Association of Orthodontists (NvVO) developed a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for EARR in accordance with the AGREE II instrument (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) in 2018. The aim of this study is to get insight into the actual utilization and the practical implementation of the guideline among orthodontists. The hypothesis to be tested was that after its introduction, clinical practice for EARR has changed towards the recommendations in the CPG. To investigate the use of the 2018 clinical practice guidelines for EARR among orthodontists 3 years after its introduction. A questionnaire using a 7-point Likert scale was developed concerning four domains of EARR described in the guideline. The questionnaire was piloted, finalised, and then distributed digitally among Dutch orthodontists. REDCap was used for data collection, starting with an invitation email in June 2021, followed by two reminders. Effect was tested by the Mann–Whitney U test, and the influence of demographic variables was analysed. Questionnaires were sent out to all 275 and completed by 133 (response rate 48%); N = 59 females and N = 73 males were included; 81% had their training in the Netherlands, 89% had ≥ 6 years of work experience, and 89% worked in private orthodontic practice. One hundred thirty orthodontists (98.5%) reported changes in clinical practice. The biggest positive change in clinical behaviour regarding EARR occurred if EARR was diagnosed during treatment. Sex, clinical experience, country of specialist training, and working environment of the respondents did not affect clinical practices regarding EARR. This questionnaire demonstrated that, 3 years after introduction of the guideline, orthodontists improved their self-reported clinical practices to a more standardised management of root resorption. None of the demographic predictors had a significant effect on the results.","PeriodicalId":56071,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Orthodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the use of a clinical practice guideline for external apical root resorption among orthodontists\",\"authors\":\"Sebastiaan P. van Doornik, Marlotte B. M. Pijnenburg, Krista I. Janssen, Yijin Ren, Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40510-024-00515-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"External apical root resorption (EARR) is a frequently observed adverse event in patients undergoing fixed appliance therapy. Assessing the patients’ risk during treatment is important, as certain factors are assumed to be associated with an increased likelihood of occurrence. However, their predictive value remains limited, making evidence-based clinical decision-making challenging for orthodontists. To address this issue, the Dutch Association of Orthodontists (NvVO) developed a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for EARR in accordance with the AGREE II instrument (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) in 2018. The aim of this study is to get insight into the actual utilization and the practical implementation of the guideline among orthodontists. The hypothesis to be tested was that after its introduction, clinical practice for EARR has changed towards the recommendations in the CPG. To investigate the use of the 2018 clinical practice guidelines for EARR among orthodontists 3 years after its introduction. A questionnaire using a 7-point Likert scale was developed concerning four domains of EARR described in the guideline. The questionnaire was piloted, finalised, and then distributed digitally among Dutch orthodontists. REDCap was used for data collection, starting with an invitation email in June 2021, followed by two reminders. Effect was tested by the Mann–Whitney U test, and the influence of demographic variables was analysed. Questionnaires were sent out to all 275 and completed by 133 (response rate 48%); N = 59 females and N = 73 males were included; 81% had their training in the Netherlands, 89% had ≥ 6 years of work experience, and 89% worked in private orthodontic practice. One hundred thirty orthodontists (98.5%) reported changes in clinical practice. The biggest positive change in clinical behaviour regarding EARR occurred if EARR was diagnosed during treatment. Sex, clinical experience, country of specialist training, and working environment of the respondents did not affect clinical practices regarding EARR. This questionnaire demonstrated that, 3 years after introduction of the guideline, orthodontists improved their self-reported clinical practices to a more standardised management of root resorption. None of the demographic predictors had a significant effect on the results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in Orthodontics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in Orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-024-00515-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-024-00515-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

外牙根尖吸收(EARR)是接受固定矫治器治疗的患者中经常出现的不良反应。在治疗过程中评估患者的风险非常重要,因为某些因素被认为与发生的可能性增加有关。然而,这些因素的预测价值仍然有限,使得正畸医生在做出循证临床决策时面临挑战。为解决这一问题,荷兰正畸医师协会(NvVO)于2018年根据AGREE II工具(研究与评估指南II)制定了EARR临床实践指南(CPG)。本研究旨在深入了解正畸医生对该指南的实际利用和实际执行情况。要检验的假设是,在该指南推出后,EARR的临床实践已朝着CPG中的建议发生了变化。调查 2018 年 EARR 临床实践指南推出 3 年后,正畸医生对该指南的使用情况。针对指南中描述的 EARR 的四个领域编制了一份采用 7 点李克特量表的调查问卷。问卷经过试用、定稿,然后以数字形式在荷兰正畸医师中分发。数据收集使用了 REDCap,从 2021 年 6 月的一封邀请邮件开始,随后又发出了两封提醒邮件。采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验法检验效果,并分析人口统计学变量的影响。向所有275名正畸医生发送了问卷,其中133人填写了问卷(回复率为48%);其中女性59人,男性73人;81%的正畸医生在荷兰接受过培训,89%的正畸医生拥有≥6年的工作经验,89%的正畸医生在私人正畸诊所工作。130名正畸医生(98.5%)报告了临床实践中的变化。如果在治疗过程中诊断出 EARR,则临床行为对 EARR 的积极改变最大。受访者的性别、临床经验、接受过专业培训的国家和工作环境均不影响有关 EARR 的临床实践。该调查问卷表明,在该指南推出 3 年后,正畸医生自我报告的临床实践有所改善,对牙根吸收的管理更加标准化。人口统计学预测因素均未对结果产生显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of the use of a clinical practice guideline for external apical root resorption among orthodontists
External apical root resorption (EARR) is a frequently observed adverse event in patients undergoing fixed appliance therapy. Assessing the patients’ risk during treatment is important, as certain factors are assumed to be associated with an increased likelihood of occurrence. However, their predictive value remains limited, making evidence-based clinical decision-making challenging for orthodontists. To address this issue, the Dutch Association of Orthodontists (NvVO) developed a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for EARR in accordance with the AGREE II instrument (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) in 2018. The aim of this study is to get insight into the actual utilization and the practical implementation of the guideline among orthodontists. The hypothesis to be tested was that after its introduction, clinical practice for EARR has changed towards the recommendations in the CPG. To investigate the use of the 2018 clinical practice guidelines for EARR among orthodontists 3 years after its introduction. A questionnaire using a 7-point Likert scale was developed concerning four domains of EARR described in the guideline. The questionnaire was piloted, finalised, and then distributed digitally among Dutch orthodontists. REDCap was used for data collection, starting with an invitation email in June 2021, followed by two reminders. Effect was tested by the Mann–Whitney U test, and the influence of demographic variables was analysed. Questionnaires were sent out to all 275 and completed by 133 (response rate 48%); N = 59 females and N = 73 males were included; 81% had their training in the Netherlands, 89% had ≥ 6 years of work experience, and 89% worked in private orthodontic practice. One hundred thirty orthodontists (98.5%) reported changes in clinical practice. The biggest positive change in clinical behaviour regarding EARR occurred if EARR was diagnosed during treatment. Sex, clinical experience, country of specialist training, and working environment of the respondents did not affect clinical practices regarding EARR. This questionnaire demonstrated that, 3 years after introduction of the guideline, orthodontists improved their self-reported clinical practices to a more standardised management of root resorption. None of the demographic predictors had a significant effect on the results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Progress in Orthodontics
Progress in Orthodontics Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
4.20%
发文量
45
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Progress in Orthodontics is a fully open access, international journal owned by the Italian Society of Orthodontics and published under the brand SpringerOpen. The Society is currently covering all publication costs so there are no article processing charges for authors. It is a premier journal of international scope that fosters orthodontic research, including both basic research and development of innovative clinical techniques, with an emphasis on the following areas: • Mechanisms to improve orthodontics • Clinical studies and control animal studies • Orthodontics and genetics, genomics • Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) control clinical trials • Efficacy of orthodontic appliances and animal models • Systematic reviews and meta analyses • Mechanisms to speed orthodontic treatment Progress in Orthodontics will consider for publication only meritorious and original contributions. These may be: • Original articles reporting the findings of clinical trials, clinically relevant basic scientific investigations, or novel therapeutic or diagnostic systems • Review articles on current topics • Articles on novel techniques and clinical tools • Articles of contemporary interest
期刊最新文献
The role of orthodontists in the multidisciplinary management of obstructive sleep apnea. Polymerization kinetics of 3D-printed orthodontic aligners under different UV post-curing conditions. Comparison of AI-assisted cephalometric analysis and orthodontist-performed digital tracing analysis. Prevalence of psychosocial findings and their correlation with TMD symptoms in an adult population sample. Breaking a dogma: orthodontic tooth movement alters systemic immunity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1