Knowledge translation for treatment planning in restorative and prosthetic dentistry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dentists should make their clinical decisions based on the best evidence available. In recent years, training in evidence-based dentistry (EBD) has been incorporated into undergraduate dental curricula to aid students in their clinical practice. However, implementation of an evidence-based practice (EBP) by dentists is very limited, especially in the field of restorative and prosthetic dentistry. Therefore, the aim of this research project was to identify and find a solution for barriers preventing EBP implementation. To identify the EBP implementation barriers, we designed and applied a paper format self-administered questionnaire on dental undergraduate and graduate students. In order to find a solution for the lack of EBP implementation, we conducted a systematic review oriented to clinical practice which extracted the data of the available literature on the survival of single-unit crowns and dental fillings performed on posterior permanent teeth. Our results demonstrated that less than two in ten students base their restorative treatment-planning on the best available evidence and this may be due to students taking too long to find an answer to the clinical question and the difficulties in indentifying the best available evidence for each specific scenario. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to facilitate EBD in restorative treatment-planning. Our systematic review showed that the more the remaining tooth structure is available, the lower the failure rate among restorative treatments. It also suggested that vital teeth with two or fewer walls left should be restored with crowns, whereas teeth with more tooth structure should be restored with dental fillings, preferably amalgam restorations. Non-vital teeth with two or fewer walls left should be treated with crowns with post and core, whereas those with more tooth structure should be treated only with crowns. The restoration of non-vital teeth with less than a wall remaining has to be reconsidered since they have very high risk of failure. In conclusion, findings from this project indicate that dental students rarely apply EBD principles into practice and the main barrier preventing EBP implementation was lack of time. Therefore, the strategy proposed in this project was to provide easily accessible evidence-based knowledge in order to facilitate restorative treatment-planning based on the best evidence. Our knowledge synthesis results showed the areas of weakness in the restorative and prosthetic dentistry literature, either by high-risk of bias or lack of information, to address many of the restorative clinical scenarios that dental students and clinicians encounter for decision-making. This work could also serve as a foundation for future development of clinical guidelines in restorative and prosthetic dentistry.Keywords: evidence-based dentistry; quality of evidence; recommendation; dental education; treatment planning; decision-making; clinical practice; restorative dentistry; dental fillings; composite resins; dental amalgam; crowns; indirect restorations; direct restorations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».