Development of a Core Outcome Set for Endodontics (COS-ENDO). Part 3: COS-ENDO for Studies of Surgical Endodontics in Permanent Teeth.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Maryam Zanjir, Elaine Cardoso, Nicola L Harman, Ava Khansari, Hamid Jafarzadeh, Gevik Malkhassian, Mike Sabeti, Anita Aminoshariae, Anil Kishen, Joanna E M Sale, Prakesh S Shah, Amir Azarpazhooh
{"title":"Development of a Core Outcome Set for Endodontics (COS-ENDO). Part 3: COS-ENDO for Studies of Surgical Endodontics in Permanent Teeth.","authors":"Maryam Zanjir, Elaine Cardoso, Nicola L Harman, Ava Khansari, Hamid Jafarzadeh, Gevik Malkhassian, Mike Sabeti, Anita Aminoshariae, Anil Kishen, Joanna E M Sale, Prakesh S Shah, Amir Azarpazhooh","doi":"10.1016/j.joen.2025.01.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Methodological heterogeneity and reporting bias complicate interpreting endodontic outcomes. Supported by the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) and its Foundation, this study developed the Core Outcome Set in Endodontics (COS-ENDO) to standardize reporting for studies of Nonsurgical Root Canal Treatment/Retreatment, Surgical Endodontics, Vital Pulp Therapy, Apexification, and Regenerative Endodontics. This manuscript, Part 3 of a 5-part series, focuses on COS-ENDO for Surgical Endodontics, while other parts address the remaining treatments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Outcomes were identified through a scoping review, a qualitative study with patients, and a web-based survey of AAE practicing members. In a two-round Delphi survey, clinicians, patients, and researchers rated outcomes on a 9-point scale. Ratings were assessed against consensus criteria, and a virtual meeting finalized COS-ENDO.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 97 invited participants to Round 1, 77 registered, and 73 (24 Academicians/Researchers, 26 Clinicians, and 23 Patients or their parents/caregivers) assessed 46 outcomes, with 17 excluded. The remaining outcomes-7 achieving consensus for inclusion and 22 lacking consensus-advanced to Round 2 for re-rating by 70 participants. This resulted in 1 outcome achieving consensus for exclusion, 10 for inclusion, and 18 lacking consensus. In the final meeting, 16 participants finalized the COS-ENDO for Surgical Endodontics, including Tooth survival, Pain, Signs of infection, Radiographic evidence of periradicular healing, Success, Functional tooth, Need for further intervention, and Adverse events/Complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>COS-ENDO is an important step in standardizing outcome reporting in endodontics, ensuring consistent reporting and enhancing research utility. Further efforts are needed to establish optimal measurement methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":15703,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endodontics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2025.01.011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Methodological heterogeneity and reporting bias complicate interpreting endodontic outcomes. Supported by the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) and its Foundation, this study developed the Core Outcome Set in Endodontics (COS-ENDO) to standardize reporting for studies of Nonsurgical Root Canal Treatment/Retreatment, Surgical Endodontics, Vital Pulp Therapy, Apexification, and Regenerative Endodontics. This manuscript, Part 3 of a 5-part series, focuses on COS-ENDO for Surgical Endodontics, while other parts address the remaining treatments.

Methods: Outcomes were identified through a scoping review, a qualitative study with patients, and a web-based survey of AAE practicing members. In a two-round Delphi survey, clinicians, patients, and researchers rated outcomes on a 9-point scale. Ratings were assessed against consensus criteria, and a virtual meeting finalized COS-ENDO.

Results: Of the 97 invited participants to Round 1, 77 registered, and 73 (24 Academicians/Researchers, 26 Clinicians, and 23 Patients or their parents/caregivers) assessed 46 outcomes, with 17 excluded. The remaining outcomes-7 achieving consensus for inclusion and 22 lacking consensus-advanced to Round 2 for re-rating by 70 participants. This resulted in 1 outcome achieving consensus for exclusion, 10 for inclusion, and 18 lacking consensus. In the final meeting, 16 participants finalized the COS-ENDO for Surgical Endodontics, including Tooth survival, Pain, Signs of infection, Radiographic evidence of periradicular healing, Success, Functional tooth, Need for further intervention, and Adverse events/Complications.

Conclusion: COS-ENDO is an important step in standardizing outcome reporting in endodontics, ensuring consistent reporting and enhancing research utility. Further efforts are needed to establish optimal measurement methods.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of endodontics
Journal of endodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
224
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endodontics, the official journal of the American Association of Endodontists, publishes scientific articles, case reports and comparison studies evaluating materials and methods of pulp conservation and endodontic treatment. Endodontists and general dentists can learn about new concepts in root canal treatment and the latest advances in techniques and instrumentation in the one journal that helps them keep pace with rapid changes in this field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信