影响普通牙医和牙髓医生根管治疗病例难度、从业者难度评分和治疗并发症的因素:一项来自国家牙科实践研究网络PREDICT项目的前瞻性队列研究。

IF 7.1 1区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Alan S Law, Sanket Nagarkar, Ellen Funkhouser, Rahma Mungia, Donald R Nixdorf, Ernest W N Lam, Ali Nosrat, Robert S Roda, Gregg H Gilbert
{"title":"影响普通牙医和牙髓医生根管治疗病例难度、从业者难度评分和治疗并发症的因素:一项来自国家牙科实践研究网络PREDICT项目的前瞻性队列研究。","authors":"Alan S Law, Sanket Nagarkar, Ellen Funkhouser, Rahma Mungia, Donald R Nixdorf, Ernest W N Lam, Ali Nosrat, Robert S Roda, Gregg H Gilbert","doi":"10.1111/iej.70019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Successful root canal treatment (RCT) is necessary for managing pulpal and periapical disease. The technical quality of RCT affects its outcome. Recognising complicating factors can be important to optimising outcomes. The aims of this study were to compare the practitioner reported case difficulty before and after completion of RCT; and to determine whether any case difficulty items were associated with complications encountered while performing the RCT.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>One hundred and four general dentists (GDs) and 49 endodontists enrolled 1860 patients needing RCT, April to September 2017. Both before RCT and upon its completion, practitioners used a 10-point scale to rate the RCT's case difficulty (Difficulty Rating [DR]). Then they used a modified Case Difficulty Assessment Form (CDAF) to record the items for difficulty using the form's list of 10 provided choices. We related practitioners' pre-RCT CDAF items to their DR ratings and to the procedural complications that they subsequently experienced during this RCT. General estimating equations (GEE) were used to assess the significance of differences in proportions between GDs and endodontists. Non-parametric tests were used to analyse compositive variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data of 1,698 patients were available for CDAF analyses. The mean CDAF was higher for endodontists than GDs (p < 0.001). Pre- and post-RCT DRs were significantly correlated (r = 0.79, p < 0.001), as were pre-RCT DR and the number of reported CDAF difficulties (r = 0.57, p < 0.001). Overall, practitioners encountered complications in treating 16% of patients. The complications were length of obturation > 2 mm from radiographic apex or beyond apex, canals not negotiable within 2 mm of apex, instrument separation, inadvertent filing/file placement past root apex, and perforation. Several CDAF items were independently predictive of complications. Despite the higher CDAF in teeth treated by endodontists, complications were less frequent among endodontists compared to GDs (13% vs. 19%, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Pre-RCT assessments predicted intra-operative difficulties and outcomes. Our work underscores the need for targeted assessment tools and specialised training to improve RCT, especially in complex cases treated by GDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":13724,"journal":{"name":"International endodontic journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors Affecting Root Canal Treatment Case Difficulty, Practitioner Rating of Difficulty and Treatment Complications Among General Dentists and Endodontists: A Prospective Cohort Study From National Dental Practice-Based Research Network PREDICT Project.\",\"authors\":\"Alan S Law, Sanket Nagarkar, Ellen Funkhouser, Rahma Mungia, Donald R Nixdorf, Ernest W N Lam, Ali Nosrat, Robert S Roda, Gregg H Gilbert\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/iej.70019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Successful root canal treatment (RCT) is necessary for managing pulpal and periapical disease. The technical quality of RCT affects its outcome. Recognising complicating factors can be important to optimising outcomes. The aims of this study were to compare the practitioner reported case difficulty before and after completion of RCT; and to determine whether any case difficulty items were associated with complications encountered while performing the RCT.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>One hundred and four general dentists (GDs) and 49 endodontists enrolled 1860 patients needing RCT, April to September 2017. Both before RCT and upon its completion, practitioners used a 10-point scale to rate the RCT's case difficulty (Difficulty Rating [DR]). Then they used a modified Case Difficulty Assessment Form (CDAF) to record the items for difficulty using the form's list of 10 provided choices. We related practitioners' pre-RCT CDAF items to their DR ratings and to the procedural complications that they subsequently experienced during this RCT. General estimating equations (GEE) were used to assess the significance of differences in proportions between GDs and endodontists. Non-parametric tests were used to analyse compositive variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data of 1,698 patients were available for CDAF analyses. The mean CDAF was higher for endodontists than GDs (p < 0.001). Pre- and post-RCT DRs were significantly correlated (r = 0.79, p < 0.001), as were pre-RCT DR and the number of reported CDAF difficulties (r = 0.57, p < 0.001). Overall, practitioners encountered complications in treating 16% of patients. The complications were length of obturation > 2 mm from radiographic apex or beyond apex, canals not negotiable within 2 mm of apex, instrument separation, inadvertent filing/file placement past root apex, and perforation. Several CDAF items were independently predictive of complications. Despite the higher CDAF in teeth treated by endodontists, complications were less frequent among endodontists compared to GDs (13% vs. 19%, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Pre-RCT assessments predicted intra-operative difficulties and outcomes. Our work underscores the need for targeted assessment tools and specialised training to improve RCT, especially in complex cases treated by GDs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13724,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International endodontic journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International endodontic journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.70019\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International endodontic journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.70019","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

目的:成功的根管治疗(RCT)是治疗牙髓和根尖周疾病的必要条件。随机对照试验的技术质量影响其结果。认识到复杂的因素对于优化结果很重要。本研究的目的是比较医生在RCT完成前和完成后报告的病例困难;并确定是否有病例难度项目与进行随机对照试验时遇到的并发症有关。方法:2017年4月至9月,104名普通牙医(GDs)和49名牙髓科医生招募了1860名需要随机对照试验的患者。在RCT之前和完成后,从业者使用10分制来评估RCT的案例难度(难度评级[DR])。然后,他们使用修改后的案例难度评估表(CDAF),使用表格提供的10个选项列表记录难度项目。我们将从业者在RCT前的CDAF项目与他们的DR评分以及他们随后在RCT中经历的程序性并发症联系起来。一般估计方程(GEE)用于评估GDs和牙髓医生之间比例差异的意义。采用非参数检验分析综合变量。结果:1698例患者的数据可用于CDAF分析。牙髓医生的平均CDAF高于GDs(距离根尖或根尖2毫米,根尖2毫米内不能移动的管,器械分离,不小心锉/锉放置过根尖,穿孔)。几个CDAF项目独立预测并发症。尽管牙髓医生治疗的牙齿的CDAF较高,但牙髓医生的并发症发生率低于GDs (13% vs. 19%)。结论:rct前评估可预测术中困难和结果。我们的工作强调需要有针对性的评估工具和专业培训来改进随机对照试验,特别是在由GDs治疗的复杂病例中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Factors Affecting Root Canal Treatment Case Difficulty, Practitioner Rating of Difficulty and Treatment Complications Among General Dentists and Endodontists: A Prospective Cohort Study From National Dental Practice-Based Research Network PREDICT Project.

Aim: Successful root canal treatment (RCT) is necessary for managing pulpal and periapical disease. The technical quality of RCT affects its outcome. Recognising complicating factors can be important to optimising outcomes. The aims of this study were to compare the practitioner reported case difficulty before and after completion of RCT; and to determine whether any case difficulty items were associated with complications encountered while performing the RCT.

Methodology: One hundred and four general dentists (GDs) and 49 endodontists enrolled 1860 patients needing RCT, April to September 2017. Both before RCT and upon its completion, practitioners used a 10-point scale to rate the RCT's case difficulty (Difficulty Rating [DR]). Then they used a modified Case Difficulty Assessment Form (CDAF) to record the items for difficulty using the form's list of 10 provided choices. We related practitioners' pre-RCT CDAF items to their DR ratings and to the procedural complications that they subsequently experienced during this RCT. General estimating equations (GEE) were used to assess the significance of differences in proportions between GDs and endodontists. Non-parametric tests were used to analyse compositive variables.

Results: Data of 1,698 patients were available for CDAF analyses. The mean CDAF was higher for endodontists than GDs (p < 0.001). Pre- and post-RCT DRs were significantly correlated (r = 0.79, p < 0.001), as were pre-RCT DR and the number of reported CDAF difficulties (r = 0.57, p < 0.001). Overall, practitioners encountered complications in treating 16% of patients. The complications were length of obturation > 2 mm from radiographic apex or beyond apex, canals not negotiable within 2 mm of apex, instrument separation, inadvertent filing/file placement past root apex, and perforation. Several CDAF items were independently predictive of complications. Despite the higher CDAF in teeth treated by endodontists, complications were less frequent among endodontists compared to GDs (13% vs. 19%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Pre-RCT assessments predicted intra-operative difficulties and outcomes. Our work underscores the need for targeted assessment tools and specialised training to improve RCT, especially in complex cases treated by GDs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International endodontic journal
International endodontic journal 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
28.00%
发文量
195
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Endodontic Journal is published monthly and strives to publish original articles of the highest quality to disseminate scientific and clinical knowledge; all manuscripts are subjected to peer review. Original scientific articles are published in the areas of biomedical science, applied materials science, bioengineering, epidemiology and social science relevant to endodontic disease and its management, and to the restoration of root-treated teeth. In addition, review articles, reports of clinical cases, book reviews, summaries and abstracts of scientific meetings and news items are accepted. The International Endodontic Journal is essential reading for general dental practitioners, specialist endodontists, research, scientists and dental teachers.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信