Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32040925›Full record

ArticleJDR clinical and translational research2021

Stakeholder Assessment of Evidence-Based Guideline Dissemination and Implementation in a Dental Group Practice.

I Gruß, D J Pihlstrom, C D Kaplan, N Yosuf, J L Fellows, E G Guerrero, D E Polk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JDR clinical and translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Current practice, barriers and facilitators to caries management in children: a qualitative study in the Netherlands.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

I GrußCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6167-0548
D J PihlstromPermanente Dental Associates, Portland, OR, USA.
C D KaplanUniversity of Southern California Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
N YosufCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, USA.
J L FellowsCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, USA.
E G GuerreroI-Lead Institute-Research to End Healthcare Disparities Corp, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
D E PolkUniversity of Pittsburgh, Pitt Dental Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1402-4068

Funding

An implementation strategy for the adoption of an evidence-based pit-and-fissure sealant guideline by salaried dental providers: Using a framework from organizational developmentU01DE027452 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI POLK, DEBORAH E · 2017 to 2021
$2.6M
NIDCR NIH HHS U01 DE027452
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis evaluation captures the perspectives of multiple stakeholders within a salaried dental care delivery organization (dentists, dental assistants, dental hygienists, and dental management) on the implementation of a pit-and-fissure sealant guideline in the Kaiser Permanente Dental Program. Also assessed is the role of formal processes and structures in providing a framework for guideline implementation.

methodsWe collected qualitative data through field observations, stakeholder interviews (n = 6), and focus groups (30 participants in 5 focus groups). Field observation notes captured summaries of conversations and other activities. Interviews and focus groups were recorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts and field notes using a template analysis with NVivo 12 software to identify themes related to the existing implementation process of clinical guidelines and stakeholder perspectives on the strengths and weaknesses of this process.

resultsStakeholders perceived 2 main barriers for achieving implementation of the pit-and-fissure sealant guideline: 1) shortcomings in the implementation infrastructure resulting in lack of clarity about the roles and responsibilities in the guideline implementation process and lack of effective mechanisms to disseminate guideline content and 2) resource constraints, such as limited human, space, and material resources. Perceived opportunities for the dissemination and implementation of guidelines included recognition of the importance of guidelines in dental practice and well-functioning workflows within dental specialties.

conclusionOur research points to the importance of developing and maintaining an infrastructure to ensure standardized, predictable mechanisms for implementation of guidelines and thereby promoting practice change. While addressing resource constraints may not be possible in all circumstances, an important step for improving guideline implementation-wherever feasible-would be the development of a robust implementation infrastructure that captures and delineates roles and responsibilities of different clinical actors in the guideline implementation process. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: The results of this study can be used by health care leadership and administrators to understand possible reasons for a lack of guideline implementation and provide suggestions for establishing sustainable infrastructure to promote the adoption of clinical guidelines in salaried dental clinics.

Indexed as

Dental CariesGroup Practice, DentalHumansPit and Fissure SealantsPit and Fissure Sealantsclinical practice guidelinesdental cariesevidence-based dentistryocclusal caries prevention and arrestingpit-and-fissure sealantsqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID32040925
PMCPMC7755945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.