Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Medicine and Health Sciences
Variation In Periodontal Diagnosis And Treatment Planning Among Clinical Instructors, Sharon K. Lanning, Scott D. Pelok, Brent C. Willians, Philip S. Richards, David P. Sarment, Tae-Ju Oh, Laurie K. Mccauley
Variation In Periodontal Diagnosis And Treatment Planning Among Clinical Instructors, Sharon K. Lanning, Scott D. Pelok, Brent C. Willians, Philip S. Richards, David P. Sarment, Tae-Ju Oh, Laurie K. Mccauley
Periodontics Publications
Consistency in clinical decision making may be necessary for reliable assessment of student performance and teaching effectiveness, yet little has been done to examine variation in periodontal diagnosis and treatment planning among dental school faculty. The purpose of this investigation was to examine variation among faculty in diagnosis and management of common periodontal diseases. Twenty-seven clinical instructors (periodontists, general dentists, dental hygienists, and first- and second-year periodontal graduate students) reviewed three web-based cases and answered a brief questionnaire focusing on radiographic interpretation, periodontal diagnosis, and treatment planning. Response rates for the three cases ranged from 62 percent to 70 percent. …
Comparison Of Accuracy Captured By Different Controlled Languages In Oral Pathology Diagnoses, Jung-Wei Chen, Catherine Flaitz, Todd Johnson
Comparison Of Accuracy Captured By Different Controlled Languages In Oral Pathology Diagnoses, Jung-Wei Chen, Catherine Flaitz, Todd Johnson
Journal Articles
This project was comparing the accuracy of capturing the oral pathology diagnoses among different coding systems. 55 diagnoses were selected for comparison among 5 coding systems. The results of accuracy in capturing oral diagnoses are: AFIP (96.4%), followed by Read 99 (85.5%), SNOMED 98 (74.5%), ICD-9 (43.6%), and CDT-3 (14.5%). It shows that the currently used coding systems, ICD-9 and CDT-3, were inadequate, whereas the AFIP coding system captured the majority of oral diagnoses. In conclusion, the most commonly used medical and dental coding systems lack terms for the diagnosis of oral and dental conditions.