Following inception in 2005 as a multiregional practice-based research network (PBRN), the “National Dental PBRN” expanded nationwide in 2012, and in 2019 implemented additional organizational changes. The objectives are to: (1) describe the new structure and function of the network; and (2) quantify its scientific productivity since 2005.

A national Administrative and Resource Center is based in Alabama; regional and specialty nodes are based in Alabama, Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Oregon, New York, and Texas. A Network Coordinating Center is based in Oregon. Studies are funded via investigator-initiated grants. Scientific productivity is assessed using specific metrics, including the Relative Citation Ratio.

To date, 58 studies have been completed or are in data collection or development. These studies have investigated a broad range of topics using a wide variety of study designs. Of the studies that have completed enrollment, 70,665 patients were enrolled, as were 19,827 practitioners (some participated in multiple studies), plus electronic records for 790,493 patients in two data-only studies. To date, these studies have led to 193 peer-reviewed scientific publications in 62 different journals. The mean (1.40) Relative Citation Ratio of Network publications connotes a greater-than-average influence in their fields.

These metrics demonstrate that the PBRN research context can successfully engage practitioners and patients from diverse settings nationally with a high and sustained level of scientific productivity. This infrastructure has enabled clinical scientists in oral health and nonoral health topics and provided additional recruitment venues outside of the typical academic health center research context.

An examination of invasive procedure cancellations found that the lack of pre-procedural oral screening was a preventable cause, for children with congenital heart disease. The purpose of this study was to implement an oral screening tool within the paediatric cardiology clinic, with referral to paediatric dental providers for positive screens. The target population were children aged ≥6 months to <18 years old, being referred for cardiac procedures.

The quality implementation framework method was used for this study design. The multi-modal intervention included education, audit and feedback, screening guidelines, environmental support, and interdisciplinary collaboration. Baseline rates for oral screenings were determined by retrospective chart audit from January 2018 to January 2019 (n = 211). Provider adherence to the oral screening tool was the outcome measure. Positive oral screens, resulting in referral to the paediatric dental clinic, were measured as a secondary outcome. Provider adherence rates were used as a process measure.

Data collected over 14 weeks showed a 29% increase in documentation of oral screenings prior to referral, as compared to the retrospective chart audit. During the study period, 13% of completed screenings were positive (n = 5). Provider compliance for the period was averaged at 70% adherence.

A substantial increase in pre-procedural oral screenings by paediatric cardiologists was achieved using the quality implementation framework and targeted interventions.

A number of studies have assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) in children; however, the role of the OAR in guiding physician radiograph use is unclear.

The primary purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which Canadian pediatric emergency physicians report using the OAR. Secondary goals included determining current diagnostic and management strategies for Salter-Harris 1 (SH-1) injuries of the ankle and which fractures physicians deem to be clinically significant.

A self-administered piloted survey was distributed by mail to 215 Canadian pediatric emergency physicians using a modified Dillman technique. Participants were selected through Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC), a national network of health care professionals with an interest in pediatric emergency medicine research.

Of 209 surveys, 144 were returned, for a response rate of 68.9%. Of those, 87.5% (126 of 144) reported applying the OAR in children to determine the need for radiographs in acute ankle or midfoot injuries. Of those, 65.1% reported using the OAR always or usually, and 64.5% (93 of 144) of physicians stated that they believe all ankle fractures are clinically significant. Although physicians report that they most commonly order the radiographs, 36.2% of participants indicated that radiographs were requisitioned by nurses or other health care providers at their facilities. SH-1 fractures were reported to be most commonly managed by immobilization (83.3%; 120 of 144), with most patients going on to follow-up with an orthopedic surgeon.

The majority of Canadian pediatric emergency physicians indicate that they use the OAR when assessing children with acute ankle and midfoot injuries. Most physicians believe that all ankle fractures, including SH-1, are clinically significant and have a management preference for immobilization and orthopedic follow-up.