BACKGROUND: Care coordination is a key strategy used to improve health outcomes and efficiency, yet there are limited examples in dentistry. A large dental accountable care organization piloted care coordination by retraining existing administrative staff to coordinate the care of high-risk patients. Following the pilots success, a formal dental care advocate (DCA) role was integrated system-wide. The goal of this new role is to improve care, patient engagement, and health outcomes while integrating staff into the clinical care team. We aim to describe the process of DCA role implementation and assess staff and clinician perceptions about the role pre- and post-implementation. METHODS: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, semi-structured interviews with clinical and operational administrative staff and observation at the company-wide training session were combined with pre- and post-implementation electronic surveys. Descriptive statistics and mean scores were tested for significance between each survey sample (t-tests), and qualitative data were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: With preliminary evidence from the pilot and strong executive support, a dedicated leadership team executed a stepwise rollout of the DCA role over 6 months. Success was facilitated by an organizational culture of frequent interventions deployed rapidly through a centralized system, along with supportive buy-in from managerial teams and high staff acceptance and enthusiasm for the DCA role before implementation. Following implementation, significant changes in attitudes and beliefs about the role were measured, though managers held stronger positive impressions than DCAs. DCAs reported high confidence in new skills and dental knowledge post-implementation, including motivational interviewing and the ability to confidently answer patients questions about their oral health. Overall, the fast-paced implementation of this new role was well received, although consistent and significant differences in mean attitudes between managers and DCAs indicate more work to fine-tune the role is needed. CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation of the new DCA role was facilitated by a strong organizational commitment to team-based dentistry and positive impressions of care coordination among staff and managers. Upskilling existing administrative staff with the necessary training to manage some high-risk patient needs is one method that can be used to implement care coordination efforts in dentistry.

OBJECTIVES: Learning health-care systems are foundational for measuring and achieving value in oral health care. This article describes the components of a preventive dental care program and the quality of care in a large dental accountable care organization. METHODS: A retrospective study design describes and evaluates the cross-sectional measures of process of care (PoC), appropriateness of care (AoC), and outcomes of care (OoC) extracted from the electronic health record (EHR), between 2014 and 2019. Annual and composite measures are derived from EHR-based clinical decision support for risk determination, diagnostic and treatment terminology, and decayed-missing-filled-teeth (DMFT) measures. RESULTS: Annually, 253,515 ± 27,850 patients were cared for with 618,084 ± 80,559 visits, 209,366 ± 22,300 exams, and 2,072,844 ± 300,363 clinical procedures. PoC metrics included provider adherence (98.3 percent) in completing caries risk assessments and patient receipt (96.9 percent) of a proactive dental care plan. AoC metrics included patients receiving prevention according to the risk-based protocol. The percent of patients at risk for caries receiving fluoride varnish was 95.4 ± 0.4 percent. OoC metrics included untreated decay and new decay. The 6-year average prevalence of untreated decay was 11.3 ± 0.3 percent, and average incidence of new decay was 13.6 ± 0.5 percent, increasing with risk level: low = 7.5 percent, medium = 18.8 percent, high = 29.4 percent, and extreme = 28.1 percent. CONCLUSIONS: The preventive dental care system demonstrates excellent provider adherence to the evidence-based prevention protocol, with measurably better dental outcomes by patient risk compared to national estimates. These achievements are enabled by a value-centric, accountable model of care and incentivized by a compensation model aligned with performance measures.

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.

Background

Attitudes and views are critical to the adoption of innovation. Although there have been broadening calls for a standardized dental diagnostic terminology, little is known about the views of private practice dental team members regarding the adoption of such a terminology.

Methods

The authors developed a survey by using validated questions identified through literature review. Domain experts' input allowed for further modifications. The authors administered the final survey electronically to 814 team members at a multioffice practice based in the US Pacific Northwest.

Results

Response proportion was 92%. The survey had excellent reliability (Cronbach α coefficient = 0.87). Results suggested that participants showed, in general, positive attitudes and beliefs about using a standardized diagnostic terminology in their practices. Additional written comments by participants highlighted the potential for improved communication with use of the terminology.

Conclusions

Dental care providers and staff in 1 multioffice practice showed positive attitudes about the use of a diagnostic terminology; specifically, they believed it would improve communication between the dentist and patient, as well as among providers, while expressing some concerns about whether using standardized dental diagnostic terms helps clinicians to deliver better dental care.

Practical implications

As the dental profession is advancing toward the use of standardized diagnostic terminology, successful implementation will require that dental team leaders prepare their teams by gauging their attitude about the use of such a terminology.

Background

Standardized dental diagnostic terminologies (SDDxTs) were introduced decades ago. Their use has been on the rise, accompanying the adoption of electronic health records (EHRs). One of the most broadly used terminologies is the Dental Diagnostic System (DDS). Our aim was to assess the adoption of SDDxTs by US dental schools by using the Rogers diffusion of innovations framework, focusing on the DDS.

Methods

The authors electronically surveyed clinic deans in all US dental schools (n = 61) to determine use of an EHR and SDDxT, perceived barriers to adoption of an SDDxT, and the effect of implementing an SDDxT on clinical productivity.

Results

The response rate was 57%. Of the 35 responses, 91% reported using an EHR to document patient care, with 84% using axiUm; 41% used the DDS. Fifty-four percent of those who did not use an SDDxT had considered adopting the DDS, but 38% had not, citing barriers such as complexity and compatibility.

Conclusions

Adoption of an SDDxT, particularly the DDS, is on the rise. Nevertheless, a large number of institutions are in the Rogers late majority and laggards categories with respect to adoption. Several factors may discourage adoption, including the inability to try out the terminology on a small scale, poor usability within the EHR, the fact that it would be a cultural shift in practice, and a perception of unclear benefits. However, the consolidation of the DDS and American Dental Association terminology efforts stands to encourage adoption.

Practical implications

The successful adoption of dental innovation depends not only on the intrinsic merit of the innovation, as some useful innovations do not achieve widespread traction. As such, it is important for health care providers to understand how to disseminate their ideas in order to ensure traction and widespread adoption.

OBJECTIVES:The purpose of this study was to adapt, test, and evaluate the implementation of a primary care "Preventive care and Screening" meaningful use quality measure for tobacco use, in dental institutions. We determined the percentage of dental patients screened for tobacco use, and the percentage of tobacco users who received cessation counseling. METHODS:We implemented the dental quality measure (DQM), in three dental schools and a large dental accountable care organization. An automated electronic health record (EHR) query identified patients 18 years and older who were screened for tobacco use one or more times within 24 months, and who received cessation counseling intervention if identified as a tobacco user. We evaluated EHR query performance with a manual review of a subsample of charts. RESULTS:Across all four sites, in the reporting calendar year of 2015, a total of 143,675 patients met the inclusion criteria for the study. Within 24 months, including 2014 and 2015 calendar years, percentages of tobacco screening ranged from 79.7 to 99.9 percent, while cessation intervention percentages varied from 1 to 81 percent among sites. By employing DQM research methodology, we identified intervention gaps in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS:We demonstrated the successful implementation of a DQM to evaluate screening rates for tobacco use and cessation intervention. There is substantial variation in the cessation intervention rates across sites, and these results are a call for action for the dental profession to employ tobacco evidence-based cessation strategies to improve oral health and general health outcomes.

Process-of-care quality measure research can be used to identify gaps in the delivery of dental services to pregnant patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the types of dental services that pregnant patients received in four dental clinics over five years as documented in the electronic health record (EHR). To accomplish this objective, the authors modified and validated a previously published claims-based dental quality measure for EHR use. After the electronic dental quality measure specifications were defined, the number of pregnant patients was calculated at three academic dental institutions and one large accountable care organization, and the types of dental care services they received over a five-year period (2013-17) were determined. Calibrated reviewers at each institution independently reviewed a sub-sample of patient charts to validate the information obtained from EHR queries, and the concordance between manual chart reviews and EHR query reports was analyzed. Of the 335,078 women aged 15-44 years who received care at the four clinics for the five reporting years, 3.9% (n=13,026) were pregnant. Among these pregnant patients, 48.9% (n=6,366) received a periodic dental examination; 30.0% (n=3,909) received a comprehensive dental exam; and 21.5% (n=2,799) received additional dental services, irrespective of comprehensive or periodic oral evaluations. Overall, the mean proportion of pregnant patients seeking care in these academic dental and group practice clinics was low, but 78.9% of them received either a periodic or comprehensive oral evaluation. Given the importance of oral health care during pregnancy, these findings suggest a need for curriculum development to incorporate prenatal oral health education in the training of dental students.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal patient level data available 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-of-care 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.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to measure the proportion of patients for which comprehensive periodontal charting, periodontal disease risk factors (diabetes status, tobacco use, and oral home care compliance), and periodontal diagnoses were documented in the electronic health record (EHR). We developed an EHR-based quality measure to assess how well four dental institutions documented periodontal disease-related information. An automated database script was developed and implemented in the EHR at each institution. The measure was validated by comparing the findings from the measure with a manual review of charts. RESULTS: The overall measure scores varied significantly across the four institutions (institution 1 = 20.47%, institution 2 = 0.97%, institution 3 = 22.27% institution 4 = 99.49%, p-value < 0.0001). The largest gaps in documentation were related to periodontal diagnoses and capturing oral homecare compliance. A random sample of 1224 charts were manually reviewed and showed excellent validity when compared with the data generated from the EHR-based measure (Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, and NPV > 80%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the feasibility of developing automated data extraction scripts using structured data from EHRs, and successfully implementing these to identify and measure the periodontal documentation completeness within and across different dental institutions.

Background

Patients with diabetes are at increased risk of developing oral complications, and annual dental examinations are an endorsed preventive strategy. The authors evaluated the feasibility and validity of implementing an automated electronic health record (EHR)-based dental quality measure to determine whether patients with diabetes received such evaluations.

Methods

The authors selected a Dental Quality Alliance measure developed for claims data and adapted the specifications for EHRs. Automated queries identified patients with diabetes across 4 dental institutions, and the authors manually reviewed a subsample of charts to evaluate query performance. After assessing the initial EHR measure, the authors defined and tested a revised EHR measure to capture better the oral care received by patients with diabetes.

Results

In the initial and revised measures, the authors used EHR automated queries to identify 12,960 and 13,221 patients with diabetes, respectively, in the reporting year. Variations in the measure scores across sites were greater with the initial measure (range, 36.4-71.3%) than with the revised measure (range, 78.8-88.1%). The automated query performed well (93% or higher) for sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for both measures.

Conclusions

The results suggest that an automated EHR-based query can be used successfully to measure the quality of oral health care delivered to patients with diabetes. The authors also found that using the rich data available in EHRs may help estimate the quality of care better than can relying on claims data.

Practical implications

Detailed clinical patient-level data in dental EHRs may be useful to dentists in evaluating the quality of dental care provided to patients with diabetes.