AIM:To determine the pre-operative and post-operative practices of general dentists (GDs) in the community for patients taking vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and direct oral anti-coagulants (DOACs). METHODS:An online questionnaire was administered to GD members of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. GDs were queried about the interaction with the medical professional prior to dental treatment, use of laboratory tests to assess bleeding risk, measures to control bleeding, and comfort level with delivering dental care. RESULTS:A total of 47.6% and 41.2% of GDs "always" consult with the patient's physician prior to an extraction in a patient on VKA or DOACs, respectively. 27.1% and 8.7% of GDs use laboratory tests to assess risk for bleeding prior to a dental extraction in patients on VKA and DOAC, respectively. For VKA patients, GDs prefer INR testing (68.4%), and for DOAC patients, most GDs are "unsure" what blood test to use. The most-used hemostatic agents were cellulose (65.1%), collagen (60.6%) and epinephrine infiltration (60.6%). CONCLUSIONS:GDs are uncertain about the best approach for patients taking DOACs. INR is not routinely used by most GDs to assess the bleeding risk in patients taking VKA. The most commonly used hemostatic agents are cellulose-based, collagen-based and vasoconstrictors.

OBJECTIVE:The objectives of this study were to: (1) describe how general dental practitioners (GDPs) in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network ('Network') classify the severity of postoperative bleeding; and (2) examine the association between bleeding severity classification and whether the GDP had residency training. METHOD AND MATERIALS:An electronic questionnaire was developed to assess GDPs' classification of bleeding severity for various scenarios following scaling or a single-tooth simple extraction, and to collect information about respondents' experience with bleeding scenarios. A total of 1,815 GDP members of the Network were invited to participate. RESULTS:A total of 866 GDPs responded. Strong agreement (low variability) was observed for scenarios that were classified as 'severe bleeding' (94.7% to 96.8%), and lower agreement (higher variability) was observed for scenarios classified as 'moderate bleeding' (53.2% to 65.2%). The GDP's classification of bleeding severity was not correlated with training in a General Practice Residency (GPR) or Advanced Education in General Dentistry (AEGD). A minority of respondents had experience with 'major bleeding' that may lead to hemodynamic emergency (15.5%) or a referral to an emergency department (4.8%). CONCLUSION:This study identified scenarios for which there is high agreement and low agreement regarding bleeding severity classification among GDPs in the US. A small percentage of respondents had actual experience with major bleeding in their patients. Based on these results, a new tool is proposed to assess the severity of oral bleeding, intended to foster better communication between dental professionals. The new tool may assist GDPs to standardize documentation and communication with other health care professionals. (Quintessence Int 2025;56:668-679; doi: 10.3290/j.qi.b6376527).

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a substantial interruption of care, with patients and workers fearful to return to the dental office. As dental practice creates a highly aerosolized environment, the potential for spread of airborne illness is magnified. As a means to increase safety and mitigate risk, pre-visit testing for SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to minimize disease transmission in dental offices. The Pragmatic Return to Effective Dental Infection Control through Testing (PREDICT) Feasibility Study examined the logistics and impact of two different testing mechanisms (laboratory-based PCR viral testing and point-of-care antigen testing) in dental offices. Methods Dental healthcare workers (DHCWs) and patients in four dental offices within the National Dental Practice-based Research Network participated in this prospective study. In addition to electronic surveys, participants in two offices completed POC testing, while participants in two offices used lab-based PCR methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection. Analysis was limited to descriptive measures, with median and interquartile ranges reported for Likert scale responses and mean and standard deviation for continuous variables. Results Of the total 72 enrolled, 28 DHCWs and 41 patients completed the protocol. Two patients (4.9%) tested positive prior to their visit, while 2 DHCWs (12.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection at the start of the study. DHCWs and patients shared similar degree of concern (69% and 63%, respectively) for contracting COVID-19 from patients, while patients feared contracting COVID-19 from DHCWs less (49%). Descriptive statistics calculations revealed that saliva, tongue epithelial cells, and nasal swabs were the most desirable specimen collection method; both testing (LAB and POC) protocols took similar amounts of total time to complete; and DHCWs and patients reported feeling more comfortable when both groups were tested. Conclusions While a larger-scale, network study is necessary for generalizability of results, this feasibility study suggests that SARS-CoV-2 testing can be effectively implemented into dental practice workflows and positively impact perception of safety for DHCWs and patients. As new virulent infectious diseases emerge, preparing dental personnel to employ an entire toolbox of risk mitigation strategies, including testing, may have the potential to decrease dental practice closure time, maintaining continuity of dental care services for patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05123742.

OBJECTIVE:Oral cancer examinations seek to clinically identify early oral cancers and discover premalignancies prior to their progression to invasive cancer. METHOD AND MATERIALS:A cross-sectional study was conducted between April and August 2017 to explore and quantify the diagnostic approach used by United States (US) general dental practitioners following discovery of an oral lesion suspicious for malignancy/premalignancy. US licensed general dental practitioners who were clinically active members of the US National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible to participate. Data for analysis were obtained via two questionnaires. RESULTS:The majority of participants were males, practiced full-time, had a suburban primary practice, were born during the 1950s, and graduated dental school in the 1980s or 2000s. After identifying an oral lesion suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy, the next action of most general dental practitioner respondents (65.4%) was to refer the patient for consultation/biopsy. Most general dental practitioners (87.2%) referred to an oral and maxillofacial surgeon; 22% of general dental practitioners reported personally biopsying suspicious lesions. There was a relatively weak association between completing an Advanced Education in General Dentistry or General Practice Residency and subsequently personally performing biopsies on patients with oral lesions suspicious for malignancy/premalignancy (OR 1.33, P = .06). Most written referrals took place electronically and often included information, including lesion location (87.0%), lesion sign/symptoms (85.3%), lesion history (83.9%), radiographs (59.3%), medical history (50.6%), dental history (48.8%), and photographs (42.4%). When a referral biopsy was performed, referring clinicians were most frequently informed of the findings via a written report (96.7%, when positive for malignancy/premalignancy, and 95.4% when negative). CONCLUSION:A snapshot is presented of current actions taken by US general dental practitioners following the discovery of oral abnormalities suspicious for premalignancy/malignancy.

Background:We describe a retrospective assessment of practitioner and patient recruitment strategies, patient retention strategies, and rates for five clinical studies conducted in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network between 2012 and 2019, and practitioner and patient characteristics associated with retention.Methods:Similar recruitment strategies were adopted in the studies. The characteristics of the practitioners and patients are described. The proportion of patients who either attended a follow-up (FU) assessment or completed an online assessment was calculated. For studies with multiple FU visits or questionnaire assessments, rates for completing each FU were calculated, as were the rates for completing any and for completing all FU assessments. The associations of practitioner and patient characteristics with all clinic FU visits, and with the completion of all assessments for a study were ascertained.Results:Overall, 591 practitioners and 12,159 patients were included. FU rates by patients for any assessment varied from 91% to 96.5%, and rates for participating in all assessments ranged from 68% to 87%. The mean total number of patients each practitioner recruited was 21 (sd = 15); the mean number per study was 13 (sd = 7). For practitioners, practice type and patient enrollment were associated with greater clinic retention, while only race was associated with their patients completing post-visit online assessments. For patients, age was associated with clinic retention, while female gender, age, race, and education were all associated with greater completion of post-visit online assessments.Conclusion:The Network efficiently recruited practitioners and patients and achieved high patient retention rates for the five studies.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the need for practitioners to enhance workflows to increase safety and mitigate risk. As dental practice creates a highly aerosolized environment, pre-visit testing for SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to be an effective mitigation strategy to minimize disease transmission in dental offices. The Pragmatic Return to Effective Dental Infection Control through Testing (PREDICT) Feasibility Study examined the potential, logistics, and impact related to laboratory-based PCR viral testing and point-of-care (POC) antigen testing. Methods Dental healthcare workers (DHCWs) and patients in four dental offices within the National Dental Practice-based Research Network participated in this prospective study. In addition to electronic surveys, participants in two offices completed POC testing, while participants in two offices used lab based PCR methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this feasibility study, analysis was limited to descriptive measures. Median and interquartile ranges were reported for Likert scale responses and mean and standard deviation for continuous variables Results Forty-one of forty-three consented patients and twenty-eight of twenty-nine DHCWs completed the protocol. Descriptive statistics calculations including median and interquartile ranges revealed (1) saliva, tongue epithelial cells and nasal swabs were the most desirable specimens for testing for groups (2) both LAB and POC protocols took similar amounts of total time to complete the full testing protocol and (3) DHCWs and patients reported feeling more comfortable when both groups were tested. Conclusions This feasibility study suggests that pre-visit SARS-CoV-2 testing can be effectively implemented into dental practice workflows and positively impact perception of safety for DHCWs and patients, though a larger scale, network study is necessary for generalizability of results. As new virulent infectious diseases continue to emerge, preparing dental personnel to employ an entire toolbox of risk mitigation strategies, including testing, may have the potential to decrease dental practice closure time, maintaining continuity of dental care services for patients. Trial registration This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05123742.

OBJECTIVES:Our aims are to describe the characteristics of dentists, members of the US National Dental practice-based research network (PBRN) in the United States, and determine how often these dentists provide specific dental procedures. METHODS:Dentists completed a questionnaire when they enrolled in the Network about their demographic and training characteristics and characteristics of their practices and patients. Dentists also reported the frequency of providing specific dental procedures. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS:Of 4,483 dentists in active clinical practice, 34% identified as females, 70% as white, and 73% as general dentists. Most dentists practiced in large metropolitan areas (87%) and in solo or small practices (72%). On average, they reported about one-half of their patients were children or older adults, a third were from historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, and one-quarter were covered by public insurance. Most dentists routinely performed restorations and fixed prosthetics (78%), extractions (59%), removable (44%) and implant (40%) prosthetics, and endodontics on incisor and premolar teeth (44%). CONCLUSIONS:Dentists participating in the National Dental PBRN have much in common with dentists at large. The network has a broad representation of dentists, practice types, patient populations, and treatments offered, including diversity regarding race/ethnicity, gender, insurance, and geography of its practitioners and patients. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE:Characteristics of National Dental PBRN dentists suggest that a broad range of dentists is interested in participating in national-level research studies, thereby enabling an array of clinical study settings and topics that can optimize the generalizability of study findings.

Background Amid the COVID-19 pandemic and other possible future infectious disease pandemics, dentistry needs to consider modified dental examination regimens that render quality care and ensure the safety of patients and dental health care personnel (DHCP). Objective This study aims to assess the acceptance and usability of an innovative mDentistry eHygiene model amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This pilot study used a 2-stage implementation design to assess 2 critical components of an innovative mDentistry eHygiene model: virtual hygiene examination (eHygiene) and patient self-taken intraoral images (SELFIE), within the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. Mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) were used to assess the acceptance and usability of the eHygiene model. Results A total of 85 patients and 18 DHCP participated in the study. Overall, the eHygiene model was well accepted by patients (System Usability Scale [SUS] score: mean 70.0, SD 23.7) and moderately accepted by dentists (SUS score: mean 51.3, SD 15.9) and hygienists (SUS score: mean 57.1, SD 23.8). Dentists and patients had good communication during the eHygiene examination, as assessed using the Dentist-Patient Communication scale. In the SELFIE session, patients completed tasks with minimum challenges and obtained diagnostic intraoral photos. Patients and DHCP suggested that although eHygiene has the potential to improve oral health care services, it should be used selectively depending on patients’ conditions. Conclusions The study results showed promise for the 2 components of the eHygiene model. eHygiene offers a complementary modality for oral health data collection and examination in dental offices, which would be particularly useful during an infectious disease outbreak. In addition, patients being able to capture critical oral health data in their home could facilitate dental treatment triage and oral health self-monitoring and potentially trigger oral health–promoting behaviors.

Introduction:Following inception in 2005 as a multiregional practice-based research network (PBRN), the "National Dental PBRN" expanded nationwide in 2012, and in 2019 implemented additional organizational changes. The objectives are to: (1) describe the new structure and function of the network; and (2) quantify its scientific productivity since 2005. Methods:A national Administrative and Resource Center is based in Alabama; regional and specialty nodes are based in Alabama, Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Oregon, New York, and Texas. A Network Coordinating Center is based in Oregon. Studies are funded via investigator-initiated grants. Scientific productivity is assessed using specific metrics, including the Relative Citation Ratio. Results:To date, 58 studies have been completed or are in data collection or development. These studies have investigated a broad range of topics using a wide variety of study designs. Of the studies that have completed enrollment, 70,665 patients were enrolled, as were 19,827 practitioners (some participated in multiple studies), plus electronic records for 790,493 patients in two data-only studies. To date, these studies have led to 193 peer-reviewed scientific publications in 62 different journals. The mean (1.40) Relative Citation Ratio of Network publications connotes a greater-than-average influence in their fields. Conclusions:These metrics demonstrate that the PBRN research context can successfully engage practitioners and patients from diverse settings nationally with a high and sustained level of scientific productivity. This infrastructure has enabled clinical scientists in oral health and nonoral health topics and provided additional recruitment venues outside of the typical academic health center research context.

Background Dental practice has been greatly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. As SARS-CoV-2 infection is transmitted by respiratory fluids, dental practice techniques, which include aerosol-generating procedures, can increase the risk of transmission causing heightened safety concerns for both dental health care workers (DHCWs) and patients. These concerns have resulted in the reduction in patient volume and the available workforce within dental practices across the United States. Standardized methods for COVID-19 triage and testing may lead to increased safety and perceptions of safety for DHCWs and their patients and promote willingness to provide and access oral health care services. Objective This study is designed to develop procedures that test the feasibility of enhanced COVID-19 triage and testing in dental offices. It will provide preliminary data to support a larger network-wide study grant application aimed at developing protocols to address safety concerns of patients and DHCWs in a peri–COVID-19 pandemic era. Methods The feasibility study is being conducted in 4 private dental practices, each of which has a dentist member of the National Dental Practice–Based Research Network. Participants include the DHCWs and patients of the dental practice. Study procedures include completion of COVID-19 triage, completion of COVID-19 testing (point-of-care [POC] or laboratory-based [LAB] SARS-CoV-2 viral, antigen, and antibody tests based on office designation), and administration of perception and attitude surveys for participating DCHWs and patients of the dental practice over a defined study period. The office designation and the participant’s role in the practice determines which testing protocol is executed within the office. There are 4 study groups following 4 distinct protocols: (1) POC DHCWs, (2) POC patients, (3) LAB DHCWs, and (4) LAB patients. Results Data collection began in December of 2021 and concluded in March 2022. Study results are expected to be published in fall 2022. Conclusions The results of this feasibility study will help identify the viability and functionality of COVID-19 triage and testing in dental practices and inform a larger network-wide study grant application that develops protocols that address safety concerns of patients and DHCWs in a COVID-19 environment. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NTC05123742; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05123742?term=NCT05123742 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/38386

Dental practice has been greatly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. As SARS-COV-2 infection is transmitted by respiratory fluids, dental practice techniques, which include aerosol-generating procedures, can increase the risk of transmission causing heightened safety concerns for both dental health care workers (DHCWs) and patients. These concerns have resulted in the reduction in patient volume and the available workforce within dental practices across the United States. Standardized methods for COVID-19 triage and testing may lead to increased safety and perceptions of safety for DHCWs and their patients and promote willingness to provide and access oral healthcare services. This study is designed to develop procedures that test the feasibility of enhanced COVID-19 triage and testing in dental offices. It will provide preliminary data to support a larger network-wide study grant application aimed at developing protocols to address safety concerns of patients and DHCWs in a peri-COVID-19 pandemic era. The feasibility study is being conducted in four private dental practices, each of which has a dentist member of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. Participants include the DHCWs and patients of the dental practice. Study procedures include completion of COVID-19 triage, completion of COVID-19 testing [Point-of-Care (POC) or laboratory based (LAB) Laboratory (LAB) SARS-CoV-2 viral, antigen and/or antibody tests based on office designation] and administration of perception and attitude surveys for participating DCHWs and patients of the dental practice over a defined study period. The office designation and participant’s role in the practice determines which testing protocol is executed within the office. There are four study groups following four distinct protocols: (1) POC DHCWs, (2) POC Patients, (3) LAB DHCWs, and (4) LAB Patients. This work has been peer reviewed and funded by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR), an institute within the National Institute of Health (NIH). Study protocols commenced in December of 2021 and are expected to end in March 2022 with data analysis to follow. The results of this feasibility study will help identify viability and functionality of COVID-19 triage and testing in dental practices and inform a larger network-wide study grant application that develops protocols that address safety concerns of patients and Dental Health Care Workers (DHCWs) in a COVID-19 environment. The ClinicalTrials.gov registration is NTC05123742.

Objective: Cracked teeth may be associated with pain, especially biting pain, and to a lesser degree cold and spontaneous pain. Described are how commonly these pains remain constant, develop, or resolve over time, none of which have been well-described, especially among untreated cracked teeth.Methods: Cracked teeth from the Cracked Tooth Registry (CTR) study were followed for 3 years. Assessments of cold, biting, and spontaneous pain and treatments performed were completed at enrollment (Y0) and at each annual recall visit.Results: 209 practitioners enrolled 2,858 patients, each with a visible crack on a posterior tooth; 2601 (91%) patients attended at least one recall visit. Overall, 960 (37%) were treated, primarily with crowns. Among both treated and untreated cracked teeth with biting pain or spontaneous pain at Y0, the vast majority (92-99%) had their pain resolved by the time of a recall visit and 85-93% remained pain-free after initial resolution. The observations for cold pain were similar: 68% (untreated) and 78% (treated) became free of cold pain at some point during follow-up, and 84% of these stayed free of cold pain after initial resolution. Few teeth developed biting or spontaneous pain (4-8%) and 44-67% of these had pain resolution during the follow-up period.Conclusion: In this study, treatment resolved a preponderance of pain associated with a cracked tooth. Pain was also resolved for most untreated cracked teeth, especially biting pain, and to a lesser degree spontaneous and cold pain, although not to the same degree as with the treated cracked teeth.

To describe treatment and monitoring outcomes of posterior teeth with cracks at baseline followed in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network for up to three years. Two hundred and nine dentists enrolled a convenience sample of 2,858 patients, each with a posterior tooth with at least one visible crack and followed them for three years. Characteristics at the patient, tooth, and crack level were recorded at baseline and at annual recall visits. Data on all teeth referred for extraction were reviewed. Data on all other teeth, treated or monitored, seen at one or more recall visits were reviewed for evidence of failure (subsequent extraction, endodontics, or recommendation for a re-treatment). The survival rate for teeth with cracks at baseline exceeded 98% (only 37 extractions), and the failure rate for teeth that were treated restoratively was only 14%. Also, only about 14% of teeth recommended at baseline for monitoring were later recommended to be treated, and about 6.5% of teeth recommended for monitoring at baseline were later treated without a specific recommendation. Thus, about 80% of teeth recommended at baseline for monitoring continued with a monitoring recommendation throughout the entire three years of the study. Treatment failures were associated with intracoronal restorations (vs. full or partial coverage) and male patients. In this large 3-year practice-based study conducted across the USA, the survival rate of posterior teeth with a visible crack exceeded 85%. Clinical relevance Dentists can effectively evaluate patient-, tooth-, and crack-level characteristics to determine which teeth with cracks warrant treatment and which only warrant monitoring.

We want to commend Drs. Psoter and Meyerowitz for their February JADA commentary titled “Dentists as a Workforce Resource” (Psoter WJ, Meyerowitz C. JADA. 2021;152(2):89-91). It reiterates and confirms our recently published case study. 1 Badner V. Saraghi M. Using dental health care personnel during a crisis: COVID-19 pandemic in the Bronx, New York. Public Health Rep. 2021; 136: 143-147 Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar In that article, we describe the efforts of 1 hospital dental staff in the Bronx, New York, to support their medical colleagues in the spring of 2020 during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. This case study, which is republished in the JADA+ COVID-19 Monograph on the experiences of the oral health workforce during the COVID pandemic, 2 Badner V. Saraghi M. Stepping up or if not now when?. https://pages.ada.org/en/covidmonograph/stepping-up-or-if-not-now-when-dr.-victor-badnerDate accessed: April 5, 2021 Google Scholar parallels the commentary’s assessment that the oral health workforce has skills and experience to be adjunctive and supportive when needed during a medical crisis. As the authors opine, dental health care personnel have training that can be extremely useful. In our case, dental anesthesia residents provided exemplary airway and critical care management. Oral maxillofacial surgery residents served in multiple roles including volunteering to be the initial staff for the drive-through testing at our hospital. Ancillary dental staff also stepped up in remarkable ways to provide phlebotomy services and to supervise infection prevention protocols; for example, donning and doffing of personal protective equipment among other supportive tasks. In some states, dentists have appropriately been approved to provide testing and to administer vaccines. As the commentary correctly concludes: Dentists as a surge workforce resourceThe Journal of the American Dental AssociationVol. 152Issue 2PreviewCOVID-19 is an ongoing example of a disaster—in fact, a catastrophic event—that informs the breadth of potential roles for dentists to assist their communities in addressing surge workforce demands. In localities facing these demands and those approaching their peak COVID-19 caseloads, we have been reminded daily of the shortage of personnel and the extensive shift hours for emergency departments and intensive care units, as well as for units with COVID-19 patients who are ill but not in critical condition. Full-Text PDF Authors’ responseThe Journal of the American Dental AssociationVol. 152Issue 6PreviewThank you Dr. Badner for the work of your hospital staff and for sharing their contributions to the readership. Dr. Badner’s case study is an early indication of the evidence available for dental personnel to be used as a local and national resource to fulfill roles in the surge workforce environment that catastrophic events can demand. His reporting that dental personnel assumed demanding hospital roles, as well as additional patient contact roles, should assure the profession that, given the need, dentists and staff have the skills to safely and effectively support the medical and public health systems. Full-Text PDF

BACKGROUND:Amid COVID-19, and other possible future infectious disease pandemics, dentistry needs to consider modified dental examination regimens that render quality care, are cost effective, and ensure the safety of patients and dental health care personnel (DHCP). Traditional dental examinations, which number more than 300 million per year in the United States, rely on person-to-person tactile examinations, pose challenges to infection control, and consume large quantities of advanced-level personal protective equipment (PPE). Therefore, our long-term goal is to develop an innovative mobile dentistry (mDent) model that takes these issues into account. This model supplements the traditional dental practice with virtual visits, supported by mobile devices such as mobile telephones, tablets, and wireless infrastructure. The mDent model leverages the advantages of digital mobile health (mHealth) tools such as intraoral cameras to deliver virtual oral examinations, treatment planning, and interactive oral health management, on a broad population basis. Conversion of the traditional dental examinations to mDent virtual examinations builds upon (1) the reliability of teledentistry, which uses intraoral photos and live videos to make diagnostic decisions, and (2) rapid advancement in mHealth tool utilization.OBJECTIVE:In this pilot project, we designed a 2-stage implementation study to assess 2 critical components of the mDent model: virtual hygiene examination (eHygiene) and patient self-taken intraoral photos (SELFIE). Our specific aims are to (1) assess the acceptance and barriers of mDent eHygiene among patients and DHCP, (2) assess the economic impact of mDent eHygiene, and (3) assess the patient's capability to generate intraoral photos using mHealth tools (exploratory aim, SELFIE).METHODS:This study will access the rich resources of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network to recruit 12 dentists, 12 hygienists, and 144 patients from 12 practices. For aims 1 and 2, we will use role-specific questionnaires to collect quantitative data on eHygiene acceptance and economic impact. The questionnaire components include participant characteristics, the System Usability Scale, a dentist-patient communication scale, practice operation cost, and patient opportunity cost. We will further conduct a series of iterative qualitative research activities using individual interviews to further elicit feedback and suggestion for changes to the mDent eHygiene model. For aim 3, we will use mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) to assess the patient's capability of taking intraoral photos, by analyzing obtained photos and recorded videos.RESULTS:The study is supported by the US National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research. This study received "single" institutional review board approval in August 2021. Data collection and analysis are expected to conclude by December 2021 and March 2022, respectively.CONCLUSIONS:The study results will inform the logistics of conducting virtual dental examinations and empowering patients with mHealth tools, providing better safety and preserving PPE amid the COVID-19 and possible future pandemics.INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):PRR1-10.2196/32345.

In his January 2021 editorial (Wright JT. Dentistry and Science 2020 Through 2021. JADA. 2021;152[1]:1-2), Dr. Wright underscored the need for research that addresses knowledge gaps to inform everyday clinical practice and increasing the profession’s access to this information. Dentistry and Science 2020 Through 2021The Journal of the American Dental AssociationVol. 152Issue 1PreviewGreetings and welcome to a new year. January 1, 2021, is the starting point for my journey as Editor in Chief of The Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA). Taking on this position is an honor and a tremendous opportunity to advance the dissemination of oral health knowledge and provide readers with important and practical information that is directed at helping improve health care. This role comes with the responsibility of working to ensure that information published in JADA is of the highest quality and based on excellent evidence and science. Full-Text PDF