The Experts below are selected from a list of 324 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Mike T John - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
nonmalignant oral disease specific Dental Patient reported outcome measures for adult Patients a systematic review
Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice, 2021Co-Authors: Ksenija Renersitar, Mike T John, Vy Truong, Sailee Tambe, Nicole TheismahonAbstract:Abstract Objectives Dental Patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) can be differentiated into outcome measures for all oral diseases, so-called disease¬generic dPROMs, and measures for specific oral diseases, so-called disease-specific dPROMs. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the psychometrically validated nonmalignant disease-specific dPROMs for adult Patients and the Dental Patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) they measure. Methods This systematic review searched Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane databases along with hand searching, through July 28, 2020, to identify original articles of English language, multi-item dPROMs for adult Dental Patients with a specific oral disease or condition or oral manifestations of systemic diseases. We analyzed the questionnaires for content commonalities, the reference or recall period, and the dimensionality. Results We retrieved 4,228 unique references and identified 34 questionnaires, of which 31 questionnaires captured impacts from oral diseases or conditions and three from oral manifestations of systemic diseases. All questionnaires together contained 102 dPROMs, measuring 75 dPROs. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) was a broader dPRO, which was measured by 24 dPROMs. The 74 narrower dPROs were measured by 78 dPROMs. The dPRO names suggested that essentially four dPROs were measured: Oral Function (N=19), Orofacial Pain (N=7), Orofacial Appearance (N=11), and Psychosocial Impact (N=37). Conclusions Many psychometrically validated tools (N=102) are available to measure the impact of specific nonmalignant oral disease on Patients. While these tools intend to measure the particular Patient-perceived impact profile of the oral disease, all tools measure in essence only four, more general concepts – the dimensions of OHRQoL.
-
Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Single Metric.
Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2020Co-Authors: Mike T JohnAbstract:Dental Patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) describe how Dental Patients suffer from oral diseases.1 Thus, dPROs are fundamental for evidence-based dentistry across Dental disciplines.2 They are essential to evaluate treatment efficacy and to reduce research waste by addressing questions relevant to clinicians and capturing what matters most to Patients.3 Doctor-Patient communication centers around them,4 and they are necessary components for value-based oral health care, a concept that relates outcomes to costs.5 Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) is the most important dPRO. Recent studies have demonstrated that OHRQoL has four main components, so called dimensions - Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact.6-8 These four dimensions, characterized by four scores, would allow to "map" all 1,323 oral diseases1 with one, single metric, thus describing oral disease impact with a standardized impact metric across all conditions in all settings. Meta-analytic statistical techniques are available to synthesize these multiple outcomes from differences sources.
-
Dental Patients functional pain related aesthetic and psychosocial impact of oral conditions on quality of life project overview data collection quality assessment and publication bias
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2020Co-Authors: Mike T John, Stella Sekulic, Birgitta Haggmanhenrikson, Nicole TheismahonAbstract:BACKGROUND Knowledge about the magnitude of Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) impairment across Dental Patient populations is essential for clinical practice, public health and research. Within the project Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric, this systematic review aimed to describe functional, pain-related, aesthetic and broader psychosocial impact of oral conditions with a single metric using OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Oro facial Pain, Oro facial Appearance and Psychosocial Impact. METHODS A search using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO was performed on 8 June 2017, and updated on 14 January 2019. Only publications in the English language were considered. To characterise the extent of available standardised and clinically relevant OHRQoL information, we determined the number of publications, Dental Patient populations, which are clinically similar, and Patient samples within each population with four-dimensional OHRQoL information using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) questionnaire. A quality assessment and a publication bias assessment were performed. RESULTS We identified 171 publications that characterised 199 Dental populations and 329 Patient samples with four-dimensional OHRQoL information. The vast majority of populations were only characterised by one Patient sample. Study quality was not related to OHRQoL magnitude, and substantial publication bias could be excluded. CONCLUSIONS Standardised and clinically relevant information using the four OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Oro facial Pain, Oro facial Appearance and Psychosocial Impact was available for a significant number of Dental Patient populations. Findings can provide a framework to interpret OHRQoL impairment of individual Patients, or groups of Patients, for clinical practice, public health and research.
-
health outcomes reported by Dental Patients
Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice, 2018Co-Authors: Mike T JohnAbstract:Abstract To assess the impact of care on Patients, Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are essential because they characterize Patients' suffering. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the instruments to assess PROs. Any report of the Patient's oral health condition that comes directly from the Patient is a Dental Patient-reported outcome (dPRO). Similar to oral health being a component of health in general, dPROs are a part of PROs. dPROs target four major areas of Patients' suffering because Dental Patients typically seek care to improve oral function and orofacial appearance as well as to decrease pain and psychosocial impact related to oral conditions. dPROs capture what matters to Dental Patients. They characterize the specific influences of oral health on Patients' lives. Dental Patient–reported outcome measures (dPROMs) capture this influence and express it numerically in a score. Consequently, dPROs in general and Oral Function, Orofacial Appearance, Orofacial Pain, as well as Psychosocial Impact (related to oral conditions) in particular are the major targets for Dental interventions in clinical practice as well as for oral health research.
Nicole Theismahon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
nonmalignant oral disease specific Dental Patient reported outcome measures for adult Patients a systematic review
Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice, 2021Co-Authors: Ksenija Renersitar, Mike T John, Vy Truong, Sailee Tambe, Nicole TheismahonAbstract:Abstract Objectives Dental Patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) can be differentiated into outcome measures for all oral diseases, so-called disease¬generic dPROMs, and measures for specific oral diseases, so-called disease-specific dPROMs. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the psychometrically validated nonmalignant disease-specific dPROMs for adult Patients and the Dental Patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) they measure. Methods This systematic review searched Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane databases along with hand searching, through July 28, 2020, to identify original articles of English language, multi-item dPROMs for adult Dental Patients with a specific oral disease or condition or oral manifestations of systemic diseases. We analyzed the questionnaires for content commonalities, the reference or recall period, and the dimensionality. Results We retrieved 4,228 unique references and identified 34 questionnaires, of which 31 questionnaires captured impacts from oral diseases or conditions and three from oral manifestations of systemic diseases. All questionnaires together contained 102 dPROMs, measuring 75 dPROs. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) was a broader dPRO, which was measured by 24 dPROMs. The 74 narrower dPROs were measured by 78 dPROMs. The dPRO names suggested that essentially four dPROs were measured: Oral Function (N=19), Orofacial Pain (N=7), Orofacial Appearance (N=11), and Psychosocial Impact (N=37). Conclusions Many psychometrically validated tools (N=102) are available to measure the impact of specific nonmalignant oral disease on Patients. While these tools intend to measure the particular Patient-perceived impact profile of the oral disease, all tools measure in essence only four, more general concepts – the dimensions of OHRQoL.
-
Dental Patients functional pain related aesthetic and psychosocial impact of oral conditions on quality of life project overview data collection quality assessment and publication bias
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2020Co-Authors: Mike T John, Stella Sekulic, Birgitta Haggmanhenrikson, Nicole TheismahonAbstract:BACKGROUND Knowledge about the magnitude of Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) impairment across Dental Patient populations is essential for clinical practice, public health and research. Within the project Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric, this systematic review aimed to describe functional, pain-related, aesthetic and broader psychosocial impact of oral conditions with a single metric using OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Oro facial Pain, Oro facial Appearance and Psychosocial Impact. METHODS A search using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO was performed on 8 June 2017, and updated on 14 January 2019. Only publications in the English language were considered. To characterise the extent of available standardised and clinically relevant OHRQoL information, we determined the number of publications, Dental Patient populations, which are clinically similar, and Patient samples within each population with four-dimensional OHRQoL information using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) questionnaire. A quality assessment and a publication bias assessment were performed. RESULTS We identified 171 publications that characterised 199 Dental populations and 329 Patient samples with four-dimensional OHRQoL information. The vast majority of populations were only characterised by one Patient sample. Study quality was not related to OHRQoL magnitude, and substantial publication bias could be excluded. CONCLUSIONS Standardised and clinically relevant information using the four OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Oro facial Pain, Oro facial Appearance and Psychosocial Impact was available for a significant number of Dental Patient populations. Findings can provide a framework to interpret OHRQoL impairment of individual Patients, or groups of Patients, for clinical practice, public health and research.
Tim Joda - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Virtual Dental Patient: How Long Until It’s Here?
Current Oral Health Reports, 2018Co-Authors: Tim Joda, Stefan Wolfart, Sven Reich, Nicola U. ZitzmannAbstract:Purpose of Review Recent developments in digital technology to be generated by superimposing different 3D imaging datasets. The aim of this literature review was to provide an update on the current status of knowledge, to report on the progress in virtual Patient science, and to identify further research needed to facilitate the translation to clinical practice. Recent Findings Case reports were identified describing different Dental Patient simulation techniques. Publications focused mainly on methodological feasibility of combining skeletal, facial, and Dental imaging to produce virtual simulations. Clinical randomized controlled trials were scarce. Summary Superimposition of 3D medical data files is a feasible technique to create a virtual Patient under static conditions. 3D image fusion is of interest and importance in all fields of Dental medicine including diagnostics, treatment, science, and education. Future research should focus on simplifying the technology, to enable virtual Patient simulation to be generated in a single-step approach.
-
the virtual Patient in Dental medicine
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2015Co-Authors: Tim Joda, German O GallucciAbstract:OBJECTIVES The aim of this Short Communication was to present a workflow for the superimposition of intraoral scan (IOS), cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), and extraoral face scan (EOS) creating a 3D virtual Dental Patient. MATERIAL AND METHODS As a proof-of-principle, full arch IOS, preoperative CBCT, and mimic EOS were taken and superimposed to a unique 3D data pool. The connecting link between the different files was to detect existing teeth as constant landmarks in all three data sets. RESULTS This novel application technique successfully demonstrated the feasibility of building a craniofacial virtual model by image fusion of IOS, CBCT, and EOS under 3D static conditions. CONCLUSIONS The presented application is the first approach that realized the fusion of intraoral and facial surfaces combined with skeletal anatomy imaging. This novel 3D superimposition technique allowed the simulation of treatment planning, the exploration of the Patients' expectations, and the implementation as an effective communication tool. The next step will be the development of a real-time 4D virtual Patient in motion.
Pamela C. Yelick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Progress in Bioengineered Whole Tooth Research: from Bench to Dental Patient Chair
Current Oral Health Reports, 2016Co-Authors: Elizabeth E. Smith, Pamela C. YelickAbstract:Significance Tooth loss is a significant health issue that affects the physiological and social aspects of everyday life. Missing teeth impair simple tasks of chewing and speaking and can also contribute to reduced self-confidence. An emerging and exciting area of regenerative medicine-based Dental research focuses on the formation of bioengineered whole tooth replacement therapies that can provide both the function and sensory responsiveness of natural teeth. This area of research aims to enhance the quality of Dental and oral health for those suffering from tooth loss. Current approaches use a combination of Dental progenitor cells, scaffolds and growth factors to create biologically based replacement teeth to serve as improved alternatives to currently used artificial Dental prosthetics. Purpose This article is an overview of current progress, challenges, and future clinical applications of bioengineered whole teeth. Conclusion Recent accomplishments suggest that whole tooth bioengineering for human tooth replacement is indeed possible and, in fact, is the future of dentistry.
-
progress in bioengineered whole tooth research from bench to Dental Patient chair
Current Oral Health Reports, 2016Co-Authors: Elizabeth E. Smith, Pamela C. YelickAbstract:Tooth loss is a significant health issue that affects the physiological and social aspects of everyday life. Missing teeth impair simple tasks of chewing and speaking, and can also contribute to reduced self-confidence. An emerging and exciting area of regenerative medicine based Dental research focuses on the formation of bioengineered whole tooth replacement therapies that can provide both the function and sensory responsiveness of natural teeth. This area of research aims to enhance the quality of Dental and oral health for those suffering from tooth loss. Current approaches use a combination of Dental progenitor cells, scaffolds and growth factors to create biologically based replacement teeth to serve as improved alternatives to currently used artificial Dental prosthetics. This article is an overview of current progress, challenges, and future clinical applications of bioengineered whole teeth.
Stephen Wilson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Pharmacological management of the pediatric Dental Patient.
Pediatric dentistry, 2004Co-Authors: Stephen WilsonAbstract:Pharmacological management of the pediatric Dental Patient is considered a subcategory of a broader collection of professional mediated activities known as behavior management techniques. Pharmacological techniques are generally divided into either: (1) various levels of sedation; or (2) general anesthesia. Pharmacological techniques are not universally offered by practicing dentists for a host of reasons including, but not limited to: (1) variation in practitioner training and philosophy; (2) state rules and regulations; (3) cost and reimbursement; and (4) safety issues.
-
The effect of electronic Dental anesthesia on behavior during local anesthetic injection in the young, sedated Dental Patient.
Pediatric Dentistry, 1999Co-Authors: Stephen Wilson, Molina Lde L, James Preisch, Joel M. WeaverAbstract:PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the 3M Electronic Dental Anesthesia (EDA) finger electrode on reducing sedated Patient responsiveness during local anesthesia administration. METHODS: Thirty Patients between the ages of 24 to 48 months, ASA I, and in need of treatment of maxillary anterior teeth using local anesthesia were used in this study. Each of the Patients received chloral hydrate (CH) and hydroxyzine (50 mg/kg and 2 mg/kg, respectively). The Patients were divided randomly in two groups. The experimental group received activated electronic Dental anesthesia (AEDA) while the control group had a nonactive EDA (NAEDA). Physiological parameters were recorded and behavior was videotaped and rated using the Ohio State University Behavior Rating Scale. A repeated-measures ANOVA, Student's tests, and descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: The results indicated that the heart rate and diastolic blood pressure of both groups were significantly affected as a function of time and Dental procedures. A significant effect in the percent change of heart rate between groups was noted during local anesthetic injection with the NAEDA group having an increased heart rate. There was a higher occurrence of movement in the NAEDA compared to the AEDA. CONCLUSION: The EDA appears to be beneficial in reducing the discomfort, as judged by behavioral and physiologic observations, associated with local anesthetic administration in young sedated Dental Patients.