Abstract
Validity and reliability of remote dental screening of different dental professionals using a store-and-forward telehealth model
Main
Br Dent J 2016;221: 411–414; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.733
Regular dental screening is important for the prevention, diagnosis and early treatment of dental caries. Efficient and effective screening might also optimise the use of limited resources, improve cost-effectiveness and reduce continued oral health disparities. Clinical examination methods have traditionally been used for caries screening. However, there is a growing interest from dental care professionals in using telehealth with digital imaging as a possible alternative; potentially improving early detection, improving patients' referrals and avoiding delays in treatment. The aim of this BDJ paper was to compare the validity and reliability of intra-oral photographic assessment in screening for dental caries between different levels of dental practitioners and against a benchmark expert panel assessment.
This retrospective descriptive study included intra-oral photographic records of 126 children taken on a DSLR camera. An expert panel of three dental practitioners reviewed all photographs to formulate a standard screening baseline. Two independent, off-site dental professionals (a hygienist/therapist and an internationally-trained dentist) then evaluated the images using web-based data and an image-viewing app built upon the Remote-i system. Fifteen percent of the intraoral photographs were re-graded at least 4 weeks after the initial scoring. The oral health assessment report were submitted and compared with the benchmark panel assessments.
All intraoral photographs were gradable, however, 5.4% of the individual teeth were scored as 'unrated' by the off-site screeners. The inter-examiner agreement between the benchmark panel and the off-site screeners was high (kappa score: 0.82–0.88). The intra-examiner agreement was similar. Across all the screeners and examination methods, the specificity and sensitivity were also high (96-97% and 81-89% respectively). The authors concluded that screeners appeared to be consistent in the way they identified caries and that photographic assessment by either a dentist or hygienist/therapist is comparable to a benchmark expert panel assessment.
In the context of a screening program the authors suggested that different members of the dental team, with minimal additional training, have the potential to detect dental caries with equivalent validity and reliability from web-based presented images. This might offer economic benefits and may increase the capacity to care for those who have no access due to distance or social exclusion.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wadia, R. Snap, send & screen. Br Dent J 221, 403 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.726
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.726