Identify and Define All Diagnostic Terms for Periapical/Periradicular Health and Disease States

James L. Gutmann, John (Craig) Baumgartner, Alan H. Gluskin, Gary R. Hartwell, Richard E. Walton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

47 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this in-depth investigation was to identify, clarify, and substantiate clinical terminology relative to apical/periapical/periradicular diagnostic states, which is used routinely in the provision of endodontic care. Furthermore, the information gleaned from this investigation was used to link diagnostic categories to symptoms, pathogenesis, treatment, and prognosis wherever possible, along with establishing the basis for the metrics used in this diagnostic process. Materials and Methods: Diagnostic terminologies and their relevance to clinical situations were procured from extensive historic and electronic searches and correlated with contemporary concepts in disease processes, clinical assessments, histologic findings (if appropriate), and standardized definitions that have been promulgated and promoted for use in the last 25 years in educational programs and test constructions and for third-party concerns. Results: In general, clinical terminology that is used routinely in the practice of endodontics is not based on the findings of scientific investigations. The diagnostic terms are based on assumptions by correlating certain signs, symptoms, and radiographic findings with what is presumed (not proven) to be the underlying disease process of a given clinical state. There were no studies that specifically tried to assess the accuracy of the metrics used contemporarily for the classification of clinical disease states. Conclusion: A succinct diagnostic scheme that could be described thoroughly, agreed on unanimously, coded succinctly for easy electronic input, and ultimately used for follow-up analysis would not only drive treatment modalities more accurately, but would also allow for future outcomes assessment and validation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1658-1674
Number of pages17
JournalJournal of Endodontics
Volume35
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2009

Fingerprint

Terminology
Endodontics
Health
Process Assessment (Health Care)
Signs and Symptoms
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

Keywords

  • Apical
  • diagnostic categories
  • diagnostic terms
  • periapical and periradicular disease

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Identify and Define All Diagnostic Terms for Periapical/Periradicular Health and Disease States. / Gutmann, James L.; Baumgartner, John (Craig); Gluskin, Alan H.; Hartwell, Gary R.; Walton, Richard E.

In: Journal of Endodontics, Vol. 35, No. 12, 12.2009, p. 1658-1674.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gutmann, James L. ; Baumgartner, John (Craig) ; Gluskin, Alan H. ; Hartwell, Gary R. ; Walton, Richard E. / Identify and Define All Diagnostic Terms for Periapical/Periradicular Health and Disease States. In: Journal of Endodontics. 2009 ; Vol. 35, No. 12. pp. 1658-1674.
@article{1bc0ce4fc8864c67a0e38ad91eb24aac,
title = "Identify and Define All Diagnostic Terms for Periapical/Periradicular Health and Disease States",
abstract = "Introduction: The purpose of this in-depth investigation was to identify, clarify, and substantiate clinical terminology relative to apical/periapical/periradicular diagnostic states, which is used routinely in the provision of endodontic care. Furthermore, the information gleaned from this investigation was used to link diagnostic categories to symptoms, pathogenesis, treatment, and prognosis wherever possible, along with establishing the basis for the metrics used in this diagnostic process. Materials and Methods: Diagnostic terminologies and their relevance to clinical situations were procured from extensive historic and electronic searches and correlated with contemporary concepts in disease processes, clinical assessments, histologic findings (if appropriate), and standardized definitions that have been promulgated and promoted for use in the last 25 years in educational programs and test constructions and for third-party concerns. Results: In general, clinical terminology that is used routinely in the practice of endodontics is not based on the findings of scientific investigations. The diagnostic terms are based on assumptions by correlating certain signs, symptoms, and radiographic findings with what is presumed (not proven) to be the underlying disease process of a given clinical state. There were no studies that specifically tried to assess the accuracy of the metrics used contemporarily for the classification of clinical disease states. Conclusion: A succinct diagnostic scheme that could be described thoroughly, agreed on unanimously, coded succinctly for easy electronic input, and ultimately used for follow-up analysis would not only drive treatment modalities more accurately, but would also allow for future outcomes assessment and validation.",
keywords = "Apical, diagnostic categories, diagnostic terms, periapical and periradicular disease",
author = "Gutmann, {James L.} and Baumgartner, {John (Craig)} and Gluskin, {Alan H.} and Hartwell, {Gary R.} and Walton, {Richard E.}",
year = "2009",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.028",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "1658--1674",
journal = "Journal of Endodontics",
issn = "0099-2399",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identify and Define All Diagnostic Terms for Periapical/Periradicular Health and Disease States

AU - Gutmann, James L.

AU - Baumgartner, John (Craig)

AU - Gluskin, Alan H.

AU - Hartwell, Gary R.

AU - Walton, Richard E.

PY - 2009/12

Y1 - 2009/12

N2 - Introduction: The purpose of this in-depth investigation was to identify, clarify, and substantiate clinical terminology relative to apical/periapical/periradicular diagnostic states, which is used routinely in the provision of endodontic care. Furthermore, the information gleaned from this investigation was used to link diagnostic categories to symptoms, pathogenesis, treatment, and prognosis wherever possible, along with establishing the basis for the metrics used in this diagnostic process. Materials and Methods: Diagnostic terminologies and their relevance to clinical situations were procured from extensive historic and electronic searches and correlated with contemporary concepts in disease processes, clinical assessments, histologic findings (if appropriate), and standardized definitions that have been promulgated and promoted for use in the last 25 years in educational programs and test constructions and for third-party concerns. Results: In general, clinical terminology that is used routinely in the practice of endodontics is not based on the findings of scientific investigations. The diagnostic terms are based on assumptions by correlating certain signs, symptoms, and radiographic findings with what is presumed (not proven) to be the underlying disease process of a given clinical state. There were no studies that specifically tried to assess the accuracy of the metrics used contemporarily for the classification of clinical disease states. Conclusion: A succinct diagnostic scheme that could be described thoroughly, agreed on unanimously, coded succinctly for easy electronic input, and ultimately used for follow-up analysis would not only drive treatment modalities more accurately, but would also allow for future outcomes assessment and validation.

AB - Introduction: The purpose of this in-depth investigation was to identify, clarify, and substantiate clinical terminology relative to apical/periapical/periradicular diagnostic states, which is used routinely in the provision of endodontic care. Furthermore, the information gleaned from this investigation was used to link diagnostic categories to symptoms, pathogenesis, treatment, and prognosis wherever possible, along with establishing the basis for the metrics used in this diagnostic process. Materials and Methods: Diagnostic terminologies and their relevance to clinical situations were procured from extensive historic and electronic searches and correlated with contemporary concepts in disease processes, clinical assessments, histologic findings (if appropriate), and standardized definitions that have been promulgated and promoted for use in the last 25 years in educational programs and test constructions and for third-party concerns. Results: In general, clinical terminology that is used routinely in the practice of endodontics is not based on the findings of scientific investigations. The diagnostic terms are based on assumptions by correlating certain signs, symptoms, and radiographic findings with what is presumed (not proven) to be the underlying disease process of a given clinical state. There were no studies that specifically tried to assess the accuracy of the metrics used contemporarily for the classification of clinical disease states. Conclusion: A succinct diagnostic scheme that could be described thoroughly, agreed on unanimously, coded succinctly for easy electronic input, and ultimately used for follow-up analysis would not only drive treatment modalities more accurately, but would also allow for future outcomes assessment and validation.

KW - Apical

KW - diagnostic categories

KW - diagnostic terms

KW - periapical and periradicular disease

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70449650512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70449650512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.028

DO - 10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.028

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 1658

EP - 1674

JO - Journal of Endodontics

JF - Journal of Endodontics

SN - 0099-2399

IS - 12

ER -