Journal of dentistry · 2022
Is tele-diagnosis of dental conditions reliable during COVID-19 pandemic? Agreement between tentative diagnosis via synchronous audioconferencing and definitive clinical diagnosis.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ali Shaymaa Abdulreda, El Ansari Walid
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess the reliability of synchronous audioconferencing teledentistry (TD) in making tentative diagnosis compared to definitive clinical face-to-face (CFTF) diagnosis; and whether agreement was influenced by dentist's experience, caller-patient relationship, and time of call.
METHODS: All patients calling the TD hotline during COVID-19 pandemic, triaged as emergency/ urgent and referred for CFTF care were included (N=191). Hotline dentists triaged the calls, made tentative audio-dentistry (AD) diagnosis, while dentists at point of referral made the definitive CFTF diagnosis. Cohen's weighted kappa (κ) assessed the extent of agreement between AD vs CFTF diagnosis.
RESULTS: There was significantly very good pair-wise agreement (κ = 0.853, P < 0.0001) between AD and CFTF diagnosis. AD diagnosis of pulpitis and periodontitis exhibited the most frequent disagreements. Tele-dentists with ≥ 20 years' experience exhibited the highest level of agreement (κ =0.872, P < 0.0001). There was perfect agreement when mothers mediated the call (κ = 1, P < 0.0001), and very good agreement for calls received between 7 am-2 pm (κ = 0.880, P < 0.0001) compared to calls received between 2-10 pm (κ = 0.793, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Remote tentative diagnosis using AD is safe and reliable. Reliability was generally very good but varied by dentist's experience, caller-patient relationship, and time of call.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The findings suggest that using AD in the home environment is safe and reliable, deploying providers with variable years of experience. The findings have generalizability potential to a variety of similar circumstances, healthcare settings and epi/pandemic situations.
METHODS: All patients calling the TD hotline during COVID-19 pandemic, triaged as emergency/ urgent and referred for CFTF care were included (N=191). Hotline dentists triaged the calls, made tentative audio-dentistry (AD) diagnosis, while dentists at point of referral made the definitive CFTF diagnosis. Cohen's weighted kappa (κ) assessed the extent of agreement between AD vs CFTF diagnosis.
RESULTS: There was significantly very good pair-wise agreement (κ = 0.853, P < 0.0001) between AD and CFTF diagnosis. AD diagnosis of pulpitis and periodontitis exhibited the most frequent disagreements. Tele-dentists with ≥ 20 years' experience exhibited the highest level of agreement (κ =0.872, P < 0.0001). There was perfect agreement when mothers mediated the call (κ = 1, P < 0.0001), and very good agreement for calls received between 7 am-2 pm (κ = 0.880, P < 0.0001) compared to calls received between 2-10 pm (κ = 0.793, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Remote tentative diagnosis using AD is safe and reliable. Reliability was generally very good but varied by dentist's experience, caller-patient relationship, and time of call.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The findings suggest that using AD in the home environment is safe and reliable, deploying providers with variable years of experience. The findings have generalizability potential to a variety of similar circumstances, healthcare settings and epi/pandemic situations.