An evaluation of the usefulness of two endodontic case assessment forms by general dentists

Ree, Marga; Timmerman, M.F.; Wesselink, Paul R.

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00688.x

Cited by 51 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Assessment of the validity of scoring instruments for complexity has been attempted, with inconclusive results (Morand , Ree et al . , Muthukrishnan et al . ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Development of quality measurement instruments for root canal treatment

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To devise measurement instruments for 'quality' of root canal treatment to assess training and outcome of general dental practitioners working within primary care settings.Method: Scoring systems relating to quality of root canal treatment were developed using expert consensus and published literature. Domains scored included the Treatment Process, Quality of the Obturation, Clinical Healing, Radiographic Healing and Tooth Complexity.Scoring systems were applied to 10 clinical cases treated by each dentist at the beginning and 10 cases treated at the end of their clinical training and 135 cases treated after completion of training. The dentists recorded the treatment process and clinical healing in clinical logs. Two examiners independently scored the radiographs after undertaking calibration and training. Inter-and intra-examiner reliability of scoring radiographic outcomes was tested.Results: Instrument created with 4 domains to assess quality (2 process and 2 outcome), and a measure of case complexity (structure). One domain of process (n=240 teeth), one domain of outcome (n=32 teeth) and the complexity (n=215 teeth) were scored using radiographs. The Kappa scores for intra-examiner reliability between 0.22 and 1, whilst interexaminer reliability ranged between 0.18 and 0.99. Conclusion: Evidence based scores for assessment of the quality (process and outcome) and complexity (structure) of root canal treatment were devised. They are reliable, provided that clinicians are trained in record keeping and examiners have in depth training and calibration in the use of the instruments.

show abstract

“…Assessment of the validity of scoring instruments for complexity has been attempted, with inconclusive results (Morand , Ree et al . , Muthukrishnan et al . ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Development of quality measurement instruments for root canal treatment

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Case assessment guidelines such as the Dutch Endodontic Treatment Index (Ree et al . ) and the American Association of Endodontists Endodontic Case Difficulty Assessment Form and Guidelines () may provide a helpful framework for structured patient evaluation, and the identification of clinical challenges. 2.4 Have knowledge of orofacial pain conditions.…”

Section: Competencies Expected Of a Graduating European Dentist In Enmentioning

confidence: 99%

Undergraduate Curriculum Guidelines for Endodontology

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…An attempt was made to test its validity but the statistical methods used covered too many variables and the results were not conclusive. 4 The Dutch Endodontic Treatment Index (DETI) 5 was devised as a short screening list to assess the risks and diffi culty of root canal treatment. If this assessment suggested diffi culty, then the Endodontic Treatment Classifi cation (ETC) 5 could be applied and a numerical value assigned, depending on the level of risk.…”

Section: Complexity Grade 3 -High (Fig 2)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 The Dutch Endodontic Treatment Index (DETI) 5 was devised as a short screening list to assess the risks and diffi culty of root canal treatment. If this assessment suggested diffi culty, then the Endodontic Treatment Classifi cation (ETC) 5 could be applied and a numerical value assigned, depending on the level of risk. Both DETI and ETC were found to be useful to assess the diffi culty of an endodontic problem and to decide whether to treat or refer to a specialist.…”

Section: Complexity Grade 3 -High (Fig 2)mentioning

confidence: 99%