A change in the approach of patient-centered clinical dental research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32776/saludybienestarsoc.v7i1.134Keywords:
Patient reported outcome, Patient-centered outcomes research, Dental research, DentistryAbstract
Clinical research in dentistry seeks to provide sound information on the efficacy and efficiency of preventive and therapeutic interventions. However, upon integration of social well-being, the health model paradigm is biopsychosocial. There has been progress in medicine toward patient centered research which seeks to produce scientific evidence on the effectiveness of different prevention and treatment options taking patient’s preferences and values into account, allowing patients, their families and providers of health services to make better informed healthcare decisions. In dentistry, there has been minor progress even though studies have incorporated “patient reported outcomes” that reflect patient’s own evaluation of their health. These outcomes have been mostly pain, and quality of life with scarce research on the patient’s vision and experience on their disease and treatment. The patient is the person that suffers the disease and needs care, that is why clinical research in dentistry should listen to the patient’s voice to attain relevant information that reflects their values, expectations, experiences, doubts, and preferences in relation to their dental treatment.
References
Glick M, Williams DM, Kleinman DV, Vujicic M, Watt RG, Weyant RJ. A new definition for oral health developed by the FDI World Dental Federation opens the door to a universal definition of oral health. Int Dent J 2016;66(6):322-324.
Hutter JW. The History of evidence-based dentistry in the ADA. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2004;4:8-11.
Badash I, Kleinman NP, Barr S, Jang J, Rahman S, Wu BW. Redefining Health: The Evolution of Health Ideas from Antiquity to the Era of Value-Based Care. Cureus 2017;9(2):e1018.
Institute of Medicine. The role of purchasers and payers in the clinical research enterprise: workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 2002.
Nass P, Levine S, Yancy C. Research priorities white paper (PCORI-SOL-RPWG-001) for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), 2012, disponible en: https://www.pcori.org/assets/Methods-for-Involving-Patients-in-Topic-Generation-for-Patient-Centered-Comparative-Effectiveness-Research-%E2%80%93-An-International-Perspective.pdf.
The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute [Internet]. Washington D.C; [citado 2021 Aug15]. Disponible en: https://www.pcori.org/
Dravet Syndrome Foundation [Internet]. Cherry Hill, NJ; [cited 2021 Aug 15]. Disponible en: https://www.dravetfoundation.org/patient-centered-outcomes-research/
Johns Hopkins Arthritis Center [Internet]. Baltimore MD; [cited 2021 Aug 15]. Disponible en: https://www.hopkinsarthritis.org/arthritis-research/patient-centered-outcomes-research/
Emory University Patient Centered Outcomes Research [Internet]. Washington DC; [citado 2021 Aug 15]. Disponible en: https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/pcor/
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research [Internet]. Switzerland; [citado 2021 Aug 15]. Disponible en: https://www.springer.com/journal/40271
Thomas FP, Saporta MA, Attarian S, Sevilla T, Sivera R, Fabrizi GM, et al. Patient-reported symptom burden of Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease Type 1A: findings from an observational digital lifestyle study. J Clin Neuromuscul Dis 2022;24(1):7-17.
Hlubocky FJ, Daugherty CK, Peppercorn J, Young K, Wroblewski KE, Yamada SD, et al. Utilization of an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Platform to Evaluate the Psychosocial and Quality-of-Life Experience Among a Community Sample of Ovarian Cancer Survivors. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2022;6:e2200035.
Grundnig JS, Steiner-Hofbauer V, Katz H, Holzinger A. 'Good' and 'bad' doctors - a qualitative study of the Austrian public on the elements of professional medical identity. Med Educ Online 2022;27(1):2114133.
FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group. BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource [Internet]. Silver Spring (MD): Food and Drug Administration (US); 2016-. Glossary. 2016 Jan 28 [Actualizado 2021 Nov 29]. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK338448/ Co-published by National Institutes of Health (US), Bethesda (MD).
Addario B, Geissler J, Horn MK, Krebs LU, Maskens D, Oliver K, Plate A, Schwartz E, Willmarth N. Including the patient voice in the development and implementation of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical trials. Health Expect 2020;23(1):41-51.
Pukeliene V, Starkauskiene V. Quality of Life: Factors Determining its Measurement Complexity. Engineering Economics 2011; 22(2).
Tsichlaki A, O'Brien K. Do orthodontic research outcomes reflect patient values? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials involving children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146(3):279-85.
Levey C, Innes N, Schwendicke F, Lamont T, Göstemeyer G. Outcomes in randomised controlled trials in prevention and management of carious lesions: a systematic review. Trials 2017;18(1):515.
Ladewig NM, Tedesco TK, Gimenez T, Braga MM, Raggio DP. Patient-reported outcomes associated with different restorative techniques in pediatric dentistry: A systematic review and MTC meta-analysis. PLoS One 2018;13(12):e0208437.
Pii KH, Schou LH, Piil K, Jarden M. Current trends in patient and public involvement in cancer research: A systematic review. Health Expect 2019;22(1):3-20.
Pousette Lundgren G, Wickström A, Hasselblad T, Dahllöf G. Amelogenesis Imperfecta and Early Restorative Crown Therapy: An Interview Study with Adolescents and Young Adults on Their Experiences. PLoS One 2016;11(6):e0156879.
Lyne A, Parekh S, Patel N, Lafferty F, Brown C, Rodd H, Monteiro J. Patient-reported outcome measure for children and young people with amelogenesis imperfecta. Br Dent J 2021 Sep 6:1–6.
