Safety Training in US Pediatric Dentistry Advanced Education Programs: A Survey of Program Directors.

Purpose: Incorporation of patient safety and quality improvement into the educational framework of all health care trainees, including those in dentistry, is growing. The purpose of this study was to characterize the current state of patient safety training and education in US pediatric dentistry residency programs. Methods: A 19-item web-based survey was emailed to all US pediatric dentistry residency program directors in 2021. The survey collected information regarding program background, safety education, safety protocol and experience, attitudes toward safety, and potential support for safety education. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test. Results: Seventy-two directors (76 percent response rate) completed the survey. The majority felt safety education was somewhat (11 percent, N equals six) or extremely important (68 percent, N equals 49) for residents. Only six percent (N equals four) reported residents entered their program with an adequate understanding of safety science. Most (74 percent, N equals 53) taught safety science through both didactic seminars and clinical experience. Timeouts under general anesthesia (78 percent, N equals 56) and emergency simulations (72 percent, N equals 52) were more common modes of clinical safety training. Overall, a limited number of program directors had familiarity with many safety tools used to prevent adverse events. Program directors' experience with adverse events was not associated with opinions regarding the importance of safety education. The majority expressed interest in AAPD supporting safety education. Conclusions: Although program directors feel safety education is important, programs do not sufficiently address safety education and look for support to help integrate safety measures into education.

Accuracy of Parental Self-Report of Medical History in a Dental Setting: Integrated Electronic Health Record and Nonintegrated Dental Record.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent of concordance and significance of inaccuracies between a parent-reported medical history in a nonintegrated electronic dental record (EDR) and an integrated electronic health record (EHR). Methods: In a retrospective institutional review board chart review, a single trained examiner compared medical histories in an EDR with the same patient's history from an EHR for concordance in sociodemographic, medical condition, allergy, and medication variables deemed significant to dental care. Of 4,282 possible patient comparisons, 291 patients were randomly sampled and compared. Concordance between record types was generated for each variable using the EHR as the ideal standard. Data were analyzed using percent match comparison and logistic regression. Results: Only 10 of 45 variables (22 percent) met the standard to match. Present conditions were more likely to be unreported than falsely reported in the EDR (58 percent). Logistic regression revealed multiple significant associations between sociodemographic variables and concordance between the EDR and EHR on specific medical conditions and medications. Conclusions: Discrepancies exist between parent-reported medical histories (EDR) and composite health histories (EHR), with the potential to compromise patient safety and create an opportunity for medical error. Social determinants of health are associated with true-positive and true-negative reporting of medications and medical conditions. EHRs allow clinicians access to a greater depth of health history information in real time compared to nonintegrated health records, but medical history-taking skills should remain at the forefront of dental education and dental practice.