This study aims to investigate burnout and study engagement among medical students at Sun Yat-sen University, China.A cross-sectional survey was conducted among undergraduate medical students of Sun Yat-sen University, China. A total of 453 undergraduate students completed a self-administered, structured questionnaire between January and February, 2016. Burnout and study engagement were measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (MBI-SS) and the UTRECHT Work Engagement Scale-Students (UWES-S), respectively. Subjects who scored high in emotional exhaustion subscale, high in cynicism subscale, and low in professional efficacy subscale simultaneously were graded as having high risk of burnout. Independent sample t tests and chi-square tests were used to compare the differences in burnout and work engagement between genders, majors, and grade levels.The means (standard deviations) of the MBI-SS subscales were 3.42 (1.45) for emotional exhaustion, 2.34 (1.64) for cynicism, and 3.04 (1.30) for professional efficacy. The means (standard deviations) of the UWES-S subscales were 3.13 (1.49) for vigor, 3.44 (1.47) for dedication and 3.00 (1.51) for absorption. Approximately 1 in 11 students experienced a high risk of burnout. There were no statistically significant gender differences in burnout and study engagement. There were also no statistically significant differences in burnout and study engagement subscales according to student major. Students in higher grades displayed increased burnout risk, higher mean burnout subscale score of cynicism, lower mean burnout subscale score of professional efficacy, and decreased mean study engagement subscale scores of dedication and absorption. There were strong correlations within study engagement subscales.Chinese medical students in this university experience a high level of burnout. Students at higher-grade level experience more burnout and decreased study engagement compared with students in lower level.

The overarching goal of the third scientific oral health symposium was to introduce the concept of a learning health system to the dental community and to identify and discuss cutting-edge research and strategies using data for improving the quality of dental care and patient safety. Conference participants included clinically active dentists, dental researchers, quality improvement experts, informaticians, insurers, EHR vendors/developers, and members of dental professional organizations and dental service organizations. This report summarizes the main outputs of the third annual OpenWide conference held in Houston, Texas, on October 12, 2022, as an affiliated meeting of the American Dental Association (ADA) 2022 annual conference.

Objectives

Electronic health records (EHRs) are rarely shared among medical and dental providers. The purpose of this study was to assess current information sharing and the value of improved electronic information sharing among physicians and dentists in Germany and the United States.

Materials and methods

A survey was validated and distributed electronically to physicians and dentists at four academic medical centers. Respondents were asked anonymously about EHR use and the medical and dental information most valuable to their practice.

Results

There were 118 responses, a response rate of 23.2%. The majority (63.9%) of respondents were dentists and the remainder were physicians. Most respondents (66.3%) rated the importance of sharing information an 8 or above on a 1-to-10 Likert scale. Dentists rated the importance of sharing clinical information significantly higher than physicians (p = 0.0033). Most (68.5%) providers could recall an instance when access to medical or dental information would have improved patient care. Dentists were significantly more likely to report this than physicians (p = 0.008).

Conclusion

Physicians would value a standardized measure of "oral health" in their EHR. Dentists were less likely to find specific medical diagnostic test results of value. Both dentists and physicians agreed that oral-systemic health was important; interoperable EHRs could facilitate information transfer between providers and enhance research on oral-systemic health connections. Both dentists and physicians believed that an interoperable EHR would be useful to practice, but desired information was different between these groups. Refinement of the information needed for shared practice is required.

Background

We can now quantify and characterize the harm patients suffer in the dental chair by mining data from electronic health records (EHRs). Most dental institutions currently deploy a random audit of charts using locally developed definitions to identify such patient safety incidents. Instead, selection of patient charts using triggers and assessment through calibrated reviewers may more efficiently identify dental adverse events (AEs).

Objective

Our goal was to develop and test EHR-based triggers at four academic institutions and find dental AEs, defined as moderate or severe physical harm due to dental treatment.

Methods

We used an iterative and consensus-based process to develop 11 EHR-based triggers to identify dental AEs. Two dental experts at each institution independently reviewed a sample of triggered charts using a common AE definition and classification system. An expert panel provided a second level of review to confirm AEs identified by sites reviewers. We calculated the performance of each trigger and identified strategies for improvement.

Results

A total of 100 AEs were identified by 10 of the 11 triggers. In 57% of the cases, pain was the most common AE identified, followed by infection and hard tissue damage. Positive predictive value (PPV) for the triggers ranged from 0 to 0.29. The best performing triggers were those developed to identify infections (PPV = 0.29), allergies (PPV = 0.23), failed implants (PPV = 0.21), and nerve injuries (PPV = 0.19). Most AEs (90%) were categorized as temporary moderate-to-severe harm (E2) and the remainder as permanent moderate-to-severe harm (G2).

Conclusion

EHR-based triggers are a promising approach to unearth AEs among dental patients compared with a manual audit of random charts. Data in dental EHRs appear to be sufficiently structured to allow the use of triggers. Pain was the most common AE type followed by infection and hard tissue damage.

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

Patient-reported outcome measures provide an essential perspective on the quality of health care provided. However, how data are collected, how providers value and make sense of the data, and, ultimately, use the data to create meaningful impact all influence the success of using patient-reported outcomes.

Objectives

The primary objective is to assess post-operative pain experiences by dental procedure type through 21 days post-procedure as reported by patients following dental procedures and assess patients' satisfaction with pain management following dental surgical procedures. Secondary objectives are to: 1) assess post-operative pain management strategies 1 week following dental surgical procedures, as recommended by practitioners and reported by patients, and 2) evaluate practitioner and patient acceptance of the FollowApp.Care post visit patient monitoring technology (FollowApp.Care). We will evaluate FollowApp.Care usage, perceived usefulness, ease of use, and impact on clinical workload.

Design and methods

We describe the protocol for an observational study involving the use of the FollowApp.Care platform, an innovative mobile application that collects dental patients' assessments of their post-operative symptoms (e.g., pain). The study will be conducted in collaboration with the National Dental Practice-based Research Network, a collective Network of dental practices that include private and group practices, public health clinics, community health centers and Federal Qualified Health Centers, academic institutional settings, and special patient populations. We will recruit a minimum of 150 and up to 215 dental providers and up to 3147 patients who will receive push notifications through text messages FollowApp.Care on their mobile phones at designated time intervals following dental procedures. This innovative approach of implementing an existing and tested mobile health system technology into the real-world dental office setting will actively track pain and other complications following dental procedures. Through patients' use of their mobile phones, we expect to promptly and precisely identify specific pain levels and other issues after surgical dental procedures. The study's primary outcome will be the patients' reported pain experiences. Secondary outcomes include pain management strategies and medications implemented by the patient and provider and perceptions of usefulness and ease of use by patients and providers.

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.