Supplements to Specific DPBRN Publications

This page provides supplementary materials for each DPBRN study (provided in the top part of this page) and then provides publication-specific information (shown by year in the bottom part of the page).

National Dental PBRN Information Sheet

Please click here to view the information sheet.

DPBRN Enrollment Questionnaire

Please click here to view the enrollment questionnaire.

DPBRN Study 1: “Dental tobacco control randomized clinical trial”

Several instruments were used for data collection in this study. Initially, the patients at each dental practice were queried about whether the dentist asked or advised about tobacco use, the patient’s smoking status and willingness to participate in a telephone interview (click here). Each dental practice completed a baseline survey about the demographics and characteristics of its practice (click here). After participating in the web intervention directed at increasing tobacco control practices in dentistry, the practices were re-assessed (click here). At the end of the study, patients who agreed to participate were contacted about the status of their tobacco use and attempts to quit (click here). Dental practices completed a final survey that assessed how their dental practice changed tobacco cessation practices (click here).

DPBRN Study 2: “Practice-based root canal treatment effectiveness”

There are no supplemental materials needed from this study. Please see the year-specific supplements below for any supplements for this study.

DPBRN Study 3: "Assessment of Caries Diagnosis and Caries Treatment" questionnaire

Please click here to view this questionnaire. Please click here to view an article from the May 2012 issue of Dr. Biscupid.

DPBRN Study 4: “Reasons for placing the first restoration on permanent tooth surfaces”

The main data collection form for this study can be viewed by clicking here. Each practitioner-investigator also kept track of how many eligible patients presented for treatment during the data collection period, along with how many of these agreed to participate in the study. This form can be viewed by clicking here. Each practice also kept track of the names of each participant because DPBRN is tracking these restorations longitudinally. This information was kept at the dental practice and at the regional office, but was not passed on to the DPBRN Coordinating Center. This form can be viewed by clicking here. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 5: “Reasons for replacement or repair of dental restorations”

DPBRN Study 6: “CONDOR case-control study of osteonecrosis of the jaws”

The main dental history form was completed via chart review, and can be viewed by clicking here. The patient interview questionnaire was done by telephone and can be viewed by clicking here.

DPBRN Study 7: “Retrospective cohort study of osteonecrosis of the jaws”

There are no supplemental materials needed from this study. Please see the year-specific supplements below for any supplements for this study.

DPBRN Study 8: “Longitudinal study of dental restorations placed in previously un-restored surfaces”

The main data collection form for this study can be viewed by clicking here. Restorations are followed annually. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 9: “Longitudinal study of repaired or replaced dental restorations”

The main data collection form for this study can be viewed by clicking here. Restorations are followed annually.

DPBRN Study 10: "Development of a patient-based provider intervention for early caries management"

In Phase I, practitioner-investigators were interviewed about their opinions on non-invasive caries treatment and patients' preferences; the interview script can be viewed here. Next, non-invasive treatment patients were offered the opportunity to provide feedback during a telephone interview. The patient interview can be accessed here. Based on information collected from patients and providers in Phase I, we designed a patient education brochure (click here) and "patient satisfaction with treatment for early caries" survey (click here) in Phase II. These two forms were handed to the patients who participated in the Phase III study. Each practitioner-investigator kept track of how many patients received non-invasive treatment for early caries during the data collection period, along with how many of these agreed to participate in the study. This form can be viewed by clicking here. Before the final data collection in Phase III, practitioner-investigators participated in an individual training session; the slides of the presentation may be found here. For each patient, practitioners completed a data collection form (click here) and a caries risk assessment form (click here). Each practice also kept track of the patients who presented with early caries and how many agreed to participate in the study. This form can be viewed by clicking here.

DPBRN Study 11: "Patient satisfaction with dental restorations"

Please click here to view the patient questionnaire. This questionnaire was returned by patients at least one day after they received a dental restoration as part of DPBRN Study 5. This questionnaire also was done in Danish, Norwegian, Spanish, and Swedish to accommodate all of the DPBRN regions. The dentist who did the dental restoration at this visit also completed a questionnaire for each patient visit. Please click here to see this questionnaire. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 12: “Prevalence of questionable occlusal caries lesions”

This study used several data forms. Specifically, the main baseline data collection form can be viewed by clicking here. If a post-baseline change of treatment was encountered, the practitioner filled out a form, which can be found by clicking here. Each practitioner-investigator also kept track of how many eligible patients presented for treatment during the data collection period, along with how many of these agreed to participate in the study. This form can be viewed by clicking here. Each practice also kept track of the names of each participant because DPBRN is tracking these restorations longitudinally. This information was kept at the dental practice and at the regional office, but was not passed on to the DPBRN Coordinating Center. This form can be viewed by clicking here.

Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region from the DPBRN "Prevalence of Questionable Occlusal Caries Lesions". The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region. Please click here to view the patient characteristics of those who enrolled in the longitudinal part of the study.

DPBRN Study 13: “Longitudinal study of questionable occlusal caries lesions”

The main data collection form for this study can be viewed by clicking here. Lesions are followed for 24 months after baseline. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 14: “Hygienists' internet tobacco cessation randomized clinical trial”

To determine study eligibility practices returned the interest survey (click here). Each dental practice completed a baseline survey on the demographics and characteristics of its practice (click here). After randomization, providers complete a qualitative survey (click here) and an online survey (click here). Patients who are referred and log-on to the patient intervention site complete an online survey (click here). The dental practices completed a final survey to reassess their tobacco control practices (click here) and the patients completed a follow-up survey to assess their smoking status six months after registering on the quit smoking website (click here).

DPBRN Study 15: “Blood glucose testing in dental practice”

This study used several data forms. The first one was the “Screening and Testing” form, which provided patient information and risk for diabetes mellitus and which can be viewed by clicking here. In the United States DPBRN regions, this form used English measurement units. In the Scandinavian region, it used metric units. If the patient qualified and agreed, this form also collected the glucose test result. Another form was a questionnaire answered by the patient (click here), which had English, Spanish, and Swedish versions. Participants received a Physician Referral Letter (click here) and an information brochure about diabetes from the American Diabetes Association (click here). We also used a questionnaire completed by the practice’s dentist and staff (click here); it provided insights regarding the feasibility of and possible barriers to glucose testing in dental practice. Each Regional Coordinator also conducted an end-of-study interview of the participating practitioner-investigators (click here). Finally, we used a “Consecutive Patient Log” (click here) and a “Master Participant List” (click here). Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 16: "Impact of dental practice-based research networks on patient care" questionnaire

Please click here to view this questionnaire. This study included all DPBRN practitioner-investigators who the met eligibility requirements. It was also administered to other practitioner-investigators in the CONDOR group. The CONDOR group - the Collaboration on Networked Dental and Oral Research - comprises three dental practice-based research networks funded by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR). These networks are DPBRN, PEARL, and NWPRECEDENT. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 17: “Peri-operative pain and root canal therapy”

Practitioner-investigators completed a data form before beginning the root canal (click here), and a different one after obturation (click here). Each practitioner-investigator also kept track of how many eligible patients presented for treatment during the data collection period, along with how many of these agreed to participate in the study. This form can be viewed by clicking here. Patients who were receiving root canal treatment completed a questionnaire immediately before treatment (click here), another one immediately after treatment (click here), and another form one week after treatment (click here). Patients also completed a form with contact information (click here). When the root canal treatment required more than one visit, comparable forms were again completed by the dentist practitioner-investigator and the patient. An additional form (click here) was completed by the dentist regarding pain and anxiety management for the treated tooth. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 18: “Persistent pain and root canal therapy”

Patients in Study 18 were followed for six months after they completed treatment in Study 17, and were asked to return a three-month form (click here) and a six-month form (click here). Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 19: "Primary care management of Temporomandibular Joint Disorders Pain" (CONDOR TMJD Study) questionnaire

Please click here to view this questionnaire. The questionnaire was completed on-line, but we provide this pdf file for your convenience. This study included all DPBRN practitioner-investigators who the met eligibility requirements. It was also completed by other practitioner-investigators in the CONDOR group. The CONDOR group - the Collaboration on Networked Dental and Oral Research - comprises three dental practice-based research networks funded by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR). These networks are DPBRN, PEARL, and NWPRECEDENT. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 20: "Infrastructure Update Survey"

Please click here to view this questionnaire. The questionnaire was completed on-line, but we provide this pdf file for your convenience. This study included all DPBRN practitioner-investigators who the met eligibility requirements. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

DPBRN Study 21: “Diagnoses for persistent dentoalveolar pain following root canal therapy”

Patients in Study 17 were followed for six months after they completed their root canal treatment. This nested case-control study brings those patients who were still reporting pain at 6 months, as well as their age-, gender- and tooth-matched controls, into the clinic to be evaluated by endodontic and orofacial pain experts. The primary goal of this study is to determine the proportion of patients with pain who would best be managed with typical dental care compared to those who have a non-odontogenic source for their pain, so that treatment directed at the etiology of their pain can occur. For the questionnaires completed by the patient-participants, click here. For the forms completed by the evaluating dentists, click here.

DPBRN Study 22: "PIRG 2011: Impact of dental practice-based research networks on patient care" questionnaire

Please click here to view this questionnaire. The questionnaire was completed on-line, but we provide this pdf file for your convenience. This study is a pre-planned re-administration of the Study 16 questionnaire, with the objective of quantifying any change since the first administration. It was also administered to other practitioner-investigators in the CONDOR group. The CONDOR group - the Collaboration on Networked Dental and Oral Research - comprises three dental practice-based research networks funded by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR). These networks are DPBRN, PEARL, and NWPRECEDENT. Please click here to see detailed report, overall and by region. The practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator who participated in the study, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. Please click here to see graphical presentation of study findings, also overall and by region.

From 2012

Please click here to see an Appendix that accompanies this article: Heaven TJ, Gordan VV, Litaker MS, Fellows JL, Rindal DB, Firestone RA, Gilbert GH for The National Dental PBRN Collaborative Group. Concordance of treatment planning thresholds for primary occlusal caries, primary proximal caries, and questionable restorations: findings from The Dental Practice-Based Research Network. Manuscript under review. This Appendix shows results from the Scandinavian dentists in The Dental PBRN regarding their treatment planning thresholds.

Please click here to see Appendices that accompany this article: Fellows JL, Gordan VV, Gilbert GH, Rindal DB, Qvist V, Litaker MS, Benjamin P, Flink H, Pihlstrom D for The DPBRN Collaborative Group. Dentist and practice characteristics associated with restorative intervention for enamel caries: findings from The Dental PBRN. Manuscript under review. The appendices show GEE parameter estimates, standard errors, and p-values for covariates during the initial steps leading to the final adjusted models of occlusal and proximal enamel caries.

Please click here to see Appendices that accompany this article: Gilbert GH, Gordan VV, Funkhouser E, Rindal DB, Fellows JL, Qvist V, Anderson G, Worley D for The DPBRN Collaborative Group. Caries treatment by dentists in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network: overall movement toward less-invasive stated approaches associated with network participation. Manuscript under review. These Appendices show the clinical scenarios that were asked of participants. click here to see an appendix that shows multivariable regressions of change score for each of the clinical scenarios.

Please click here to see the supplementary factor analysis and click here to see the supplementary analysis of patient participation that accompany this article: Riley JL III, Gordan VV, Rindal DB, Fellows JL, Qvist V, Sager P, Foy P, Williams OD, Gilbert GH for The DPBRN Collaborative Group. Components of patient satisfaction with a dental restorative visit: results from The Dental Practice-Based Research Network. Journal of the American Dental Association 2012; accepted for publication.

Please click here to see a supplementary table that accompanies this article: Gordan VV, Riley JL, Geraldeli S, Rindal DB, Qvist V, Fellows JL, Kellum HP, Gilbert GH, for The DPBRN Collaborative Group. Repair or replacement of defective restorations by dentists in The Dental PBRN. Journal of the American Dental Association 2012; accepted for publication. The supplementary table is about the definitions used for the main reason that a restoration was repaired or replaced.

From 2011

Please click here to see four supplementary tables that accompany this article: Nascimento MM, Gordan VV, Qvist V, Bader JD, Rindal DB, Williams OD, Gewartowski D, Fellows JL, Litaker MS, Gilbert GH for The DPBRN Collaborative Group. Restoration of non-carious defects by dentists in The Dental PBRN. Journal of the American Dental Association 2011; 142(12): 1368-1375. These tables provide information on: (1) the distribution of the number of restorations placed due to NCTD, per patient and by reason for restoration; (2) the multiple logistic regression analysis of the reasons for restoring NCTD; (3) the number and percentage of DPBRN dentists and patients participating in the study, and the number and percentage of restorations placed by dentists from each DPBRN region; and (4) the distribution of the reasons for the restoration, by tooth characteristics and type of restorative material used.

From 2010

Materials that were used for DPBRN’s first network-wide meeting of practitioner-investigators from all five of its regions are available here. This meeting took place in Atlanta, GA from May 15-17, 2008. Please click here to see the agenda for the meeting. Please click here to see the summary of findings from the DPBRN "Assessment of Caries Diagnosis and Caries Treatment Questionnaire" and its accompanying letter, which was mailed to attendees forty-five days in advance of the meeting. This practitioner-specific report was sent to each practitioner-investigator, and it had his or her own answers to each question along with the summary of responses from all practitioner-investigators. click here to see the questionnaire that was completed by all practitioner-investigator attendees at the meeting’s registration desk before they entered the meeting. click here to see the questionnaire that each practitioner-investigator attendee completed soon after the meeting ended. Another table (click here) shows the characteristics of the 126 practitioner-investigators who attended the meeting. These materials supplement this manuscript: Gilbert GH, Richman JS, Qvist V, Pihlstrom DJ, Foy PJ, Gordan VV for the DPBRN Collaborative Group. Change in stated clinical practice associated with participation in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network. General Dentistry 2010; 58(6): 520-528.

Please click on the following links for a table and two figures that accompany: Riley JL III, Gordan VV, Rindal DB, Fellows JL, Ajmo CT, Amundson C, Anderson GA, Gilbert GH, for The DPBRN Collaborative Group. Preferences for caries prevention agents in adult patients: findings from The Dental Practice-Based Research Network. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 2010; 38(4): 360-70. The table here presents the demographic information for participating DPBRN dentists. The first figure (click here) shows the occlusal lesion clinical case scenario and the second figure (click here) shows the interproximal lesion clinical case scenario.

Please click here to see a summary of characteristics of eligible dentists who participated for the "Assessment of Caries Diagnosis and Caries Treatment Questionnaire" compared to those who did not. This supplements this manuscript: Gordan VV, Bader JD, Garvan CW, Richman JS, Qvist V, Fellows JL, Rindal DB, Gilbert GH, for the DPBRN Collaborative Group. Restorative treatment thresholds for occlusal primary caries by dentists in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network. Journal of the American Dental Association 2010; 141(2): 171-184.

From 2009

Please click here to see two tables that accompany: Boykin MJ, Gilbert GH, Tilashalski KR, Litaker MS. Racial differences in baseline treatment preference as predictors of receiving a dental extraction versus root canal therapy during 48 months of follow-up. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 2009; 69(1): 41-47. The first table shows predisposing, enabling, and need characteristics of persons in the sample, by race. The second table shows a “parsimonious” regression of receipt of extraction or root canal treatment during follow-up, in which only two variables (worst periodontal attachment loss and the CHOICE variable) are modeled as predictors of this outcome. The model fit of this regression model (Model 3 in the table labeled A2) is statistically the same as the model fit in Model 2 of the same table.

From 2008

Please click here to see two tables that accompany: Houston TK, Richman J, Ray M, Allison JJ, Gilbert GH, Shewchuk R, Kohler C, Kiefe CI, for the DPBRN Collaborative Group. A randomized trial of internet-delivered support for tobacco control in dental practice: a Dental PBRN study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2008; 10(5): e38. The first table shows practice characteristics of practices with and without follow-up data in the Dental Tobacco Control.net clinical trial. The second table shows pre-intervention patient-reported provider performance.

Please click here to see Tables A1 – A3 that accompany: Gilbert GH, Bader JD, Litaker MS, Shelton BJ, Duncan RP. Patient-level and practice characteristics associated with receipt of preventive dental services: 48-month incidence. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 2008; 68(4): 209-217. An additional table (Table A4) has the baseline characteristics of the 597 subjects who were included in the data analyses for this paper. To see that table, Please click here.

From 2007

Please click here to see a table of means and standard errors of characteristics of dental practice(s) attended during follow-up, by race and level of formal education of the participant. This supplements a similar table in the manuscript that shows results stratified by household income instead of education. Please click here to see a table of means and standard errors of characteristics of dental practice(s) attended, by approach to care. These supplement: Gilbert GH, Litaker MS, Makhija SM. Differences in quality between dental practices associated with race and income mix of patients. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 2007; 18(4): 847-867.

From 2006

Please click here to see two tables that accompany: Gilbert GH, Shewchuk RM, Litaker MS. Effect of dental practice characteristics on racial disparities in patient-specific tooth loss. Medical Care 2006; 44(5): 414-420.