Ashley C. Grill

Periodontal Diagnosis Affected by Variation in Terminology

BACKGROUNDnThe randomized case presentation (RCP) study is designed to assess the degree of diagnostic accuracy for described periodontal cases. This is to lay the basis for practitioner calibration in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network for future clinical studies.nnnMETHODSnThe RCP consisted of 10 case scenarios ranging from periodontal health to gingivitis and mild, moderate, and severe periodontitis. Respondents were asked to diagnose the described cases. Survey diagnoses were compared to two existing classifications of periodontal disease status. The RCP was administered via a proprietary electronic data capture system maintained by the PEARL Data Coordinating Center. Standard analytic techniques, including frequency counts and cross-tabulations, were used for categorical data with mean and standard deviation and median values reported for continuous data elements.nnnRESULTSnDemonstrable variations in periodontal assessment for health, gingivitis, and mild, moderate, and severe periodontitis were found among the 130 PEARL general practitioners who participated in the RCP survey. The highest agreement for diagnosis among dentists was for severe periodontitis (88%) and the lowest for gingivitis (55%). The highest percentage of variation was found in cases with health and gingivitis.nnnCONCLUSIONSnThere was variation among PEARL practitioners in periodontal diagnosis that may affect treatment outcomes. Our findings add clinical support to recent publications suggesting a need for standardization of terminology in periodontitis diagnosis.

Practice-based research network infrastructure design for institutional review board risk assessment and generalizability of clinical results

Data from clinical studies generated by practice-based research networks (PBRNs) should be generalizable to the health care profession. For nationally representative data, a broad recruitment of practitioners may pose added risks to institutional review boards (IRBs). Infrastructure must assure data integrity while minimizing risk to assure that the clinical results are widely accepted across medical disciplines. The PEARL Network is an interdisciplinary dental/medical PBRN conducting a broad range of clinical studies. The infrastructure is designed to support the principles of good clinical practice (GCP) and create a data audit trail to ensure data integrity for generalizability. As the PBRN concept becomes of greater interest, membership may expand beyond the local community, and the issue of geography versus risk management becomes of concern to the IRB. The PEARL Network describes how it resolves many of the issues related to recruiting on a national basis while maintaining study compliance to ensure patient safety and minimize risk to the IRB.

Practice Based Research Networks Impacting Periodontal Care: PEARL Initiative

In 2005, the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research /National Institutes of Health funded the largest initiative to date to affect change in the delivery of oral care. This commentary provides the background for the first study related to periodontics in a Practice Based Research Network (PBRN). It was conducted in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research & Learning (PEARL) Network. The PEARL Network is headquartered at New York University College of Dentistry. The basic tenet of the PBRN initiative is to engage clinicians to participate in clinical studies, where they will be more likely to accept the results and to incorporate the findings into their practices. This process may reduce the translational gap that exists between new findings and the time it takes for them to be incorporated into clinical practice. The cornerstone of the PBRN studies is to conduct comparative effectiveness research studies to disseminate findings to the profession and improve care. This is particularly important because the majority of dentists practice independently. Having practitioners generate clinical data allows them to contribute in the process of knowledge development and incorporate the results in their practice to assist in closing the translational gap. With the advent of electronic health systems on the horizon, dentistry may be brought into the mainstream health care paradigm and the PBRN concept can serve as the skeletal framework for advancing the profession provided there is consensus on the terminology used.

An assessment of the perceived benefits and challenges of participating in a practice-based research network.

Background A survey was conducted to describe the benefits of and challenges to practitioner participation in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network, a dental practice-based research network (PBRN). The results were compared with results from medical PBRNs across different tiers of participation (based on practitioner-investigators previous involvement with PEARL research protocols). Methods A 39-item web-based survey addressed the benefits of PBRN participation on three levels: individual/practitioner, practice (office), and community/professional. Participants were also asked to rate challenges to participation. Results A total of 153 of 216 PEARL practitioner-investigators participated, a response rate of 71%. The majority (70%) was male, with a median of 23 years in private practice. ‘Means to stay informed of new developments in my profession’ was considered a ‘very important’ benefit for nearly three-quarters of the sample (71%). ‘Opportunity to improve clinical procedures’ was considered as ‘very important’ by 73% of respondents. In terms of benefits related to the community and profession, 65% of respondents reported ‘means to directly contribute to the evidence base of dental practice’ as being ‘very important’. ‘Disruption in practice routine/clinical practice’ was considered the most important challenge to participation. Conclusions The benefits of and challenges to participation identified did not differ across tiers of participation and were similar to benefits identified by participants in medical PBRNs. The results of this study will help facilitate the design of future PBRN protocols to encourage greater participation by the profession. Results suggest that practitioners with similar interests could be recruited to collaborative studies between medicine and dentistry.