|     
   
    
 |  |   Dental Screenings Using Telehealth
    Technology: A Pilot Study   S. Patterson, B.Sc., DDS, MPH  C. Botchway, BDS, LDSRCS (Eng), MSC (Uni Lon) DDPHRCS (Eng)
 ABSTRACT   Background   This pilot study compared data obtained using traditional
    methods of visual dental screenings in a school setting with data obtained using an
    intraoral camera and transmitted to a distant location via telehealth technology. 
     Methods   For the study, 137 schoolchildren were screened using
    traditional methods. Two months later, 32 children were randomly selected and rescreened
    in a single day using the intraoral camera and the telehealth system. The measurement
    indices used were deft/DMFT.   Results   A comparison revealed no significant difference in the
    data collected by the two screening methods. The percentage agreement between the methods
    ranged from 89% to 100%.   Conclusion   In under-serviced or remote areas, the telehealth system
    may allow for accurate identification of oral conditions and act as a means of
    consultation at a distance between specialists, general dental practitioners, dental
    hygienists and individual patients.    MeSH Key Words:    dental care; rural health services;
    telemedicine/instrumentation.   © J Can Dent Assoc 1998; 64:806-10   This article has been peer reviewed.   [ Methods and Materials | Results | Discussion
    | Conclusions ]   Introduction   Telehealth is a joining of telecommunications technology
    with health delivery. Using interactive video, audio and computer technologies as the
    information transfer platform, medical information can be transmitted over long distances
    between urban centres and under-serviced rural areas.1  Through the use of conventional telephone lines,
    microwaves or satellite link-ups, physicians at a central medical hub can examine and
    treat patients at multiple satellite locations.2 Telehealth can be used for
    situations in which (1) physical barriers prevent the ready transfer of information
    between the health care professional and patient, and (2) information availability is key
    to proper medical management.3   Much of the framework for telehealth technology is
    currently in place. Telephones have proven to be economical and reliable for data
    transmission.4 Many dental offices are already equipped with intraoral cameras,
    video monitors and computers,5 and digital imaging systems6 are becoming more
    widespread.   The University of Alberta Telehealth Centre is the
    collaborative effort of an interdisciplinary health committee. The Telehealth Centre is
    currently linked to the Two Hills Health Care Centre in eastern Alberta, and steps are
    being taken to expand telehealth sites to other communities in the province. Many health
    disciplines including dentistry could make use of this technology in delivering clinical
    diagnostic services to remote areas that are unaccessed by dental specialists or, in some
    cases, general dental practitioners.       
      
        |  |  
        | Fig. 1: Dental hygiene students operating
        telehealth equipment at Two Hills site. |    Many dental public health programs are involved in oral
    health screenings in school settings throughout the province. This level of programming
    requires moving equipment and qualified staff to remote locations. It does not allow for
    direct consultations with dental practitioners since public health dental hygienists or
    assistants complete this work. As telehealth technology spreads across the province,
    dental programs could potentially utilize this mode of communication for consultations,
    diagnostic appointments, data collection and post-treatment evaluation.   This pilot study investigated whether the
    use of telehealth communication technology and intraoral cameras for completing visual
    oral health screenings would be comparable to visual screenings in the traditional school
    setting. Implementation of such technology could potentially reduce the need for highly
    trained health workers to commute to and from remote areas for purposes of screenings,
    oral diagnosis and referral. In addition, if images transmitted via telehealth technology
    correspond to those seen in person, then consultations between specialists in central
    locations and health care workers in remote areas could be carried out. 
       [ Top ] Methods and Materials   The University of Alberta Telehealth Centre was
    established utilizing the LinkCarer System, which was developed by Hughes Training Inc.,
    an Arlington, Texas, company. LinkCarer has a modular design that allows for different
    levels of equipment and capability that are open, upgradeable and easily integrated. The
    system ranges from full diagnostic treatment to triage/monitoring, and includes fully
    interactive audio and video components that transmit consultations, medical databases,
    real-time ultrasound and moving images (ECGs), heart, lung and blood flow sounds,
    radiographs, EKGs, EEGs and other diagnostic study records, live video pictures of
    affected body parts and tissues, and precise still images.   The link between the Telehealth Centre and Two Hills is
    via telephone lines, although capacity for satellite, microwave and cellular transmission
    is also a possibility for future connections. A coder-decoder device (CODEC) digitizes and
    compresses the video and audio signals and transmits images using a relatively small,
    narrow bandwidth. There are two 20-inch monitors with standard resolution, one for viewing
    the local site and one for viewing the distant site. The sites are connected by a two-way
    audio system. Both sites have document cameras with graphic capabilities for presenting
    still images only and single-chip cameras, which can be panned, tilted and zoomed locally
    or remotely by a touchscreen controller. The touchscreen controller is used to control all
    of the operations except the computer. Each site has a VCR, a computer, and diagnostic
    instruments. A patient camera at the remote site allows for a greater degree of
    magnification and detail resolution in transmitting live images.7 The intraoral
    camera system utilized was the Revealr system by Patterson Dental.   The subjects for the pilot were children who attended Two
    Hills Elementary School and who had received parental consent for the regular public
    health dental screening. A total of 137 children were screened at the school by a
    registered public health dental hygienist and a registered dental assistant (who acted as
    recorder), both of whom had been trained by the regional dental officer. This initial
    screening was to provide baseline data using the traditional method of data collection in
    the school. The indices used were deft/DMFT. An intraoral mirror, a portable chair and a
    light source were utilized. Appropriate infection control procedures were followed. All of
    the 137 children were given a letter of consent for the second screening explaining the
    purpose of the telehealth screening and the methods employed.   Two months later, the second screening was carried out on
    32 randomly selected children in each grade who had received parental consent for the
    telehealth screening. After time for travel and equipment set up at the Two Hills Health
    Care Centre, the children were screened using the intraoral camera. Of the 32 screenings,
    only 27 data results were analyzed as five children had lost teeth in the two months since
    the school screening, thus altering the deft/DMFT scores from the original screening. 
     Three dental hygiene students and the regional dental
    officer conducted the telehealth screenings. One student operated the intraoral camera
    while another assisted with the children. The same portable light source, intraoral
    mirrors and infection control procedures were employed as in the school screenings. The
    images picked up on the intraoral camera were transmitted to the Telehealth Centre, where
    the same dental hygienist and dental assistant who had participated in the first screening
    received and interpreted the images using deft/DMFT as their indices.   The telehealth equipment involved two TV monitors (Fig.
    1). One monitor displayed the camera image being sent to the other location and the other
    monitor displayed the image being received from the distant site. Audio communication was
    also available. All verbal communication was clear and understandable. If any difficulty
    in visualizing a particular surface of a tooth was noted, requests for the camera to be
    moved were made by the recorders at the Telehealth Centre.   The results of the first and second
    inspection were compiled through a spreadsheet, charting both the deft and DMFT. The score
    and number of errors were analyzed for percentage agreement. Chi-squared tests indicated
    that there were no significant differences between the two screening methods, and
    statistically, the results were similar.  
 
      
        | Table I |  
        | Screening Results for the Primary Dentition (deft
        Index) |  
        | 
          
            | Number of Teeth | School Screening Number of Children | Telehealth Screening Number of Children |  
            | Decay: |  
            | 0 | 22 | 24 |  
            | 1 | 4 | 2 |  
            | 2 | 0 | 1 |  
            | 3 | 1 | 0 |  
            | To be extracted: |  
            | 0 | 23 | 23 |  
            | 1 | 3 | 3 |  
            | 2 | 1 | 1 |  
            | Filled: |  
            | 0 | 17 | 17 |  
            | 1 | 3 | 3 |  
            | 2 | 2 | 2 |  
            | 4 | 1 | 1 |  
            | 5 | 2 | 2 |  
            | 6 | 1 | 1 |  
            | 9 | 0 | 1 |  
            | 10 | 1 | 0 |         
          
            | Table II |  
            | Screening Results for the Permanent Dentition
            (DMFT Index) |  
            | 
              
                | Number of Teeth | School Screening Number of Children | Telehealth Screening Number of Children |  
                | Decay: |  
                | 0 | 26 | 24 |  
                | 1 | 0 | 2 |  
                | 2 | 1 | 1 |  
                | Missing: |  
                | 0 | 21 | 21 |  
                | Filled: |  
                | 0 | 21 | 21 |  
                | 1 | 4 | 4 |  
                | 2 | 1 | 1 |  
                | 3 | 1 | 1 |         
              
                | Table III |  
                | Inter-method Agreement and Reliability for School
                and Telehealth Screenings |  
                | 
                  
                    | Index Category | % Agreement | Kappa Statistic |  
                    | Primary decay | 89 | 0.58 |  
                    | Primary to be extracted | 100 | 1.0 |  
                    | Primary filled | 96 | 0.93 |  
                    | Permanent decay | 93 | 0.50 |  
                    | Permanent missing | 100 | 1.0 |  
                    | Permanent filled | 100 | 1.0 |   [ Top ]
 Resuts   The initial baseline data obtained from the visual oral
                health screenings in the school were compared with data obtained from the telehealth
                screenings for primary tooth decay, primary teeth needing extraction, and primary restored
                teeth (deft index), and for permanent tooth decay, permanent teeth missing due to caries
                and permanent restored teeth (DMFT index). Only small variations occurred between the two
                methods (Tables I and II). Chi-squared tests were used at p<0.05. The groups showed no
                statistically significant differences.   Kappa statistics8 were applied to the data to determine
                agreement in excess of that expected through chance (Table III). Perfect agreement existed
                for the three categories of primary teeth to be extracted, permanent teeth missing and
                permanent teeth filled. For both the primary and permanent teeth with decay groups, the
                kappa statistic showed moderate agreement, and for the group in which primary teeth were
                to be filled, the agreement was very good. The percentage agreement between the
                traditional school visual screening and the telehealth screening was very close, and in
                those areas where variation occurred, the kappa agreement showed moderate to very good
                agreement.    Overall, the screening results between the
                traditional and telehealth methods of performing dental screenings were similar, with no
                difference found in the areas of detection of primary teeth to be extracted or filled, and
                permanent missing teeth.     [ Top ] Discussion   Though not new to medicine, telehealth technology has not
                become part of every day health care or dentistry. Technical immaturity, economic
                feasibility and legal considerations may be partly responsible for its restricted role.
                Cost-effectiveness is also an important consideration in evaluating its potential use.
                Capital equipment costs for the telehealth system are very high and will vary from
                facility to facility. The cost of the LinkCarer System, which can have many equipment
                configurations, can range from approximately $40,000 to $130,000. For dental screenings to
                be cost-effective using this system, it would likely be necessary for the telehealth
                infrastructure to be already present. Alberta Health is currently considering expanding
                the telehealth equipment to more sites within the province, which would allow a
                "piggyback" effect for completing dental consultation and screening services
                without having to purchase and install equipment solely for that purpose. If a health
                facility or clinic purchased telehealth equipment, then the capital costs could be passed
                on in the form of user fees for the clinicians or groups utilizing the equipment. 
                 This study showed that a number of factors contributed to
                the cost of each process. Both types of screenings involved a team consisting of a dental
                hygienist and a dental assistant. Extra personnel were required at both the school and the
                telehealth facility to help with getting the children to and from the screening site.
                Set-up time was similar in both settings. Although the telehealth screening time per child
                was initially a little slower, experience with the system eventually allowed for the two
                types of screenings to take about the same amount of time.   There were, however, differences between the two methods
                that would impact on any cost-benefit analysis. The school dental screenings involved the
                cost and time of travel for the dental staff to go to the school. For the telehealth
                screenings, the costs involved transporting the children from the school to the health
                facility (which in this case were assumed by the school), the cost of having a trained
                person operating the intraoral camera (which may or may not be a person with dental
                training), and the cost of using the telehealth equipment.   There was no cost to the public health dental program for
                utilizing the Two Hills Health Centre equipment, as both groups belong to the Lakeland
                Regional Health Authority. If a system were to be used on a regular basis, and the capital
                and transmission costs factored into any user fees, then the investment would eventually
                be covered. Hopefully, the individual cost of using such equipment would not be too
                prohibitive. Further studies are needed to investigate the very real issue of the economic
                viability of this technology.   The merits of the telehealth screening method include the
                fact that it is a potentially mobile system that can be manipulated by trained, non-dental
                personnel. The telehealth system also allows for clear communication of visual and audio
                data over great distances, all in real time, thereby significantly reducing travel time
                and costs for both practitioner and patient. (It can also accommodate patient assessments,
                history taking, transmission of digital data, radiographs and stilled images, either in
                real time or on videotape for later use.) The technology could also be used for real time,
                pre-authorization for dental insurance benefits.   Potential weaknesses of this method include the cost of
                equipment, especially in start-up cases. As well, for clinicians unaccustomed to using an
                intraoral camera, some preparation time and practise in visualizing the teeth and oral
                cavity is required. Training of the distant health care worker in the use of the intraoral
                camera is also necessary. It was noted, for example, that care needs to be taken during
                the transmission of the visual image to ensure that correct colour tone and brightness are
                achieved. Furthermore, if the screening is to be completed without the use of explorers,
                there will be an accompanying loss of detail in the data recorded as no tactile
                information will be transmitted. The system was found to be most effective in identifying
                missing and filled teeth, probably because these two areas are easily visualized and do
                not require tactile sense to detect. Another reason for this may be that there were very
                few teeth in these index categories. The percentage agreement in these categories was
                predominantly on sound teeth. Less agreement was observed in the detection of decay.  
                 No explorers were utilized in the study. It is possible
                that the dental hygienist was so accustomed to using an explorer for detecting decay that
                she found using only visual detection less definitive or reliable than detection using
                tactile sensation. In addition, visual detection of decay may have been hindered due to
                the unfamiliarity with intraoral viewing of teeth. These factors could have introduced
                variability in the recording of carious lesions and would have potentially decreased her
                intra-examiner reliability. If concern existed in a clinical setting about the loss of
                detailed diagnostic information as a result of not having the remote inspections completed
                with the use of an explorer, both digital radiographs and standard films could be easily
                transmitted to enhance the information being collected.   The population pool of the study was small
                due to time constraints on that school day and to the fact that five children out of the
                32 had lost some of their teeth, which impacted on their deft score. Their inclusion in
                the study would have inappropriately reduced the statistical accuracy of the telehealth
                screenings. In retrospect, it would have been prudent to reduce the time interval between
                the first and second screenings to avoid the potential for change in the deft/DMFT status
                as a result of exfoliation or dental treatment.     [ Top ] Conclusion   This pilot study indicated that the data collected using
                the telehealth system was similar to that of the traditional, intraoral visual screenings
                currently completed in public health dental programs. The telehealth system enables
                reliable, remote observation of oral conditions such as decayed, missing and filled or
                extracted teeth. It is used to transmit oral images to dental hygienists, dentists or
                specialists in urban centres for consultation or educational purposes (for example,
                communication with dental students in satellite locations). Although digital imaging is
                becoming more widespread and available in dentistry, the use of telehealth technology in
                remote dental screenings will depend on the existence of telehealth equipment throughout
                the province. The extensive cost of establishing telehealth sites will require financial
                support and a utilization across a broad spectrum of health care disciplines. Although
                networking of this technology may require some initial cost and implementation time, once
                fully developed, the system could offer a simple and reliable alternative to remote dental
                care.    Acknowledgment: Special recognition and thanks
                go to the following dental hygienists and assistants for their invaluable assistance in
                carrying out this project: Shari Holland, Cory McQuaig, Patrick Miklos, Jennifer Parsons,
                Afae Rodwell, Sandy Tillotson and Sherry Kokotailo.   The cooperation and support of the Lakeland Regional
                Health Authority, Two Hills Health Care Centre and Two Hills Elementary School was greatly
                appreciated.   Dr. Patterson is director of continuing dental
                education in the Department of Oral Health Sciences, University of Alberta, and director
                of the Dental Public Health Centre, University of Alberta.   Dr. Botchway is a clinical assistant professor
                in the Department of Oral Health Sciences, University of Alberta, and is a member of the
                Dental Public Health Centre, University of Alberta.   Reprint requests to: Dr. S. Patterson,
                Department of Oral Health Sciences, Dentistry/Pharmacy Centre, University of Alberta,
                Edmonton, AB T6G 2N8.   The authors have no declared financial interest in any
                company manufacturing the types of products mentioned in this article.   References   1. Alberta Telehealth Project Planning Team. Whither
                telehealth: How can a province-wide system work in Alberta? The Alberta Telehealth Project
                _ Working Document. Sept. 1996.   2. Sanders JH, Tedesco FJ. Telemedicine: Bringing medical
                care to isolated communities. J Med Assoc Ga 1993; 87:237-41.   3. Perednia DA, Allen A. Telemedicine technology and
                clinical applications. JAMA 1995; 273:483-7.   4. Gitlin JN. Teleradiology. Radiol Clin North Am 1986;
                24:55-68.   5. Tyndall DA, Boyd KS, Matterson SR, Dove SB. Video-based
                teleradiology for intraosseous lesions. A receiver operating characteristic analysis. Oral
                Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 80:599-603.   6. Dzierzka J. Computer imaging: Its practical
                application. JADA 1991; 122:41-4.   7. Edgington EM, Pimlott JFL. Telehealth technology: A new
                medium for in-service education. Probe 1998; 32:97-101.   8. Altman DG. Practical statistics for
                medical research. Chapman and Hall, London, 1991.     [ Top ]   |    |    |    |