Murdoch Alexander Ivon King, Blum Jordan, Chen Jie, Baziotis-Kalfas Dean, Dao Angelie, Bai Kevin, Bekheet Marina, Atwal Nimret, Cho Sarah Sung Hee, Ganhewa Mahen, Cirillo Nicola
Melbourne Dental School, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
CoTreat Pty Ltd., Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Mar 13;13(6):1076. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13061076.
Clinical decision-making for diagnosing and treating oral and dental diseases consolidates multiple sources of complex information, yet individual clinical judgements are often made intuitively on limited heuristics to simplify decision making, which may lead to errors harmful to patients. This study aimed at systematically evaluating dental practitioners' clinical decision-making processes during diagnosis and treatment planning under uncertainty. A scoping review was chosen as the optimal study design due to the heterogeneity and complexity of the topic. Key terms and a search strategy were defined, and the articles published in the repository of the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed) were searched, selected, and analysed in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Of the 478 studies returned, 64 relevant articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Studies that were included were based in 27 countries, with the majority from the UK and USA. Articles were dated from 1991 to 2022, with all being observational studies except four, which were experimental studies. Six major recurring themes were identified: clinical factors, clinical experience, patient preferences and perceptions, heuristics and biases, artificial intelligence and informatics, and existing guidelines. These results suggest that inconsistency in treatment recommendations is a real possibility and despite great advancements in dental science, evidence-based practice is but one of a multitude of complex determinants driving clinical decision making in dentistry. In conclusion, clinical decisions, particularly those made individually by a dental practitioner, are potentially prone to sub-optimal treatment and poorer patient outcomes.
口腔和牙科疾病诊断与治疗的临床决策整合了多个复杂信息源,但个体临床判断往往基于有限的启发法直观做出,以简化决策过程,这可能导致对患者有害的错误。本研究旨在系统评估牙科医生在不确定性诊断和治疗计划过程中的临床决策过程。由于该主题的异质性和复杂性,选择了范围综述作为最佳研究设计。定义了关键词和检索策略,并按照PRISMA-ScR指南对美国国立医学图书馆(MEDLINE/PubMed)数据库中发表的文章进行检索、筛选和分析。在检索到的478项研究中,64篇相关文章被纳入定性综合分析。纳入的研究来自27个国家,其中大多数来自英国和美国。文章发表时间为1991年至2022年,除4项为实验性研究外,其余均为观察性研究。确定了六个主要反复出现的主题:临床因素、临床经验、患者偏好和认知、启发法和偏差、人工智能和信息学以及现有指南。这些结果表明,治疗建议存在不一致的可能性很大,尽管牙科科学取得了巨大进步,但循证实践只是推动牙科临床决策的众多复杂决定因素之一。总之,临床决策,尤其是牙科医生个人做出的决策,可能容易导致治疗效果欠佳和患者预后较差。