|
|
||||||||
1 Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics, Department of Medical Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; and
2 Dental School, University of Heidelberg, Germany;
Correspondence: * corresponding author, Ekkehard_Finkeissen{at}med.uni-heidelberg.de
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
KEY WORDS: Dentistry medical informatics software knowledge ontologies Internet guideline
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Prior approaches for dental treatment planning were restricted to partial aspects of a solution (Cordato, 1996; Han et al., 1998; Sellen et al., 1998; Zhang et al., 1998; Balch et al., 1999; Okumura et al., 1999; Pan et al., 1999). In contrast, AIDAs methodology aims at a top-down partitioning of dental decision-making. Here, the separation of medical, technical, economic, and legal aspects organizes the multi-dimensional complexity of dentistry into small, easy-to-handle planning modules.
Before building a decision support system, one must clarify the parts of the dental tasks that have to be anticipated, i.e., planned. Moreover, not all parts of the planning can be automated. And computer support is useful only in cases of optimization of the overall treatment process. In other words, computer-based decision support can cover only specific parts of the dental tasks (Fig. 1
).
|
| The AIDA Methodology |
|---|
|
|
|---|
However, a decision methodology is abstracted from individual cases and cannot include all aspects of any individual patient. Accordingly, it is up to the dentist to select one of AIDAs treatment suggestions and examine it in detail, if desired.
Since many of the fixed prosthetic solutions in dentistry involve more than one tooth, an appraisal of their necessity should be performed as early as possible; only this allows for the assessment of their effects on other teeth. After the possible prosthetic treatment alternatives have been determined, detailed questions can be clarified to test the concrete applicability of the desired prosthetic solution (i.e., periodontal requirements).
A comparison of AIDA treatment planning with real-life patient records has already yielded valuable indications for extensions and adaptations related to the planning rules (Cordato, 1996). The current version of AIDA includes specific planning aspects of restorative dentistry which are related to the planning of a prosthetic construction. From this extension, a further increase in both recall and precision is expected in AIDAs planning.
| The Current AIDA Agents |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The transfer of findings is currently being adapted to a new standard established within the AIDA project. This new standard is aiming at a concise coding of the patient status, with a current emphasis on information about the set of teeth.
After re-implementation, the AIDA planning suggestions can be accessed both via Web browser and by other machines (e.g., dental billing software) (Fig. 2
).
|
In the next versions, the AIDA agents will be able to provide information on further questions:
In the latest version, AIDAs output is provided in XML format and can be visualized in a human-readable form by style sheets. Thus, both humans and machines can use AIDAs planning, where the styles can be adapted to the user roles (expert, practitioner, patient).
The solutions provided by AIDA can, therefore, be passed along to a billing program and shown on the planning form. The dentist can accept one of the suggestions and edit it as desired. The treatment planning for fixed prostheses can soon be planned online and for free (Fig. 3
).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
During the development of AIDA, it became clear that a uniform and structured method of documentation for the comprehensible communication of dental decisions is essential. Fundamental deficits in the practice of dental documentation were revealed (Finkeissen et al., 2002a). Currently, the AIDA team includes further specifications for dental documentation.
A nationwide expansion of the dental expert team will hopefully critique AIDAs output, thereby providing support for planning precision as well as the integration of a broader range of treatment alternatives into the AIDA methodology. As soon as AIDA includes a convincing number of treatment alternatives, its structure can also serve the definition of comparative studies on the evaluation of the individual treatment alternatives that can later be included into the AIDA approach.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Cordato M (1996). A mathematical study of anterior dental relations: Part II, Incisor and canine overjet. Aust Orthod J 14(3):143149.[Medline]
Eisner J (1999). The future of dental informatics. Eur J Dent Educ 3:6169.
Finkeissen E (2002). Zahnmedizinische EntscheidungsstrukturenGrundlagen einer wissensbasierten Zweitmeinung. In: Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Informatik, Abteilung Medizinische Informatik. Heidelberg: Universität Heidelberg.
Finkeissen E, Hassfeld S, Koke U, Helmstetter-Blasius C, Eickholz P, Wetter T (2002a). Problems with current dental documentation in Germany. Heidelberg, Germany: Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics, Department of Medical Informatics, p. 15.
Finkeissen E, Koke U, Hassfeld S, Helmstetter C, Weber R, Wetter T (2002b). AIDAiterative approach for the improvement of a knowledge-based decision methodology in dentistry. Quintessence Int (submitted).
Han K, Lu R, Ma Y, Lu P, Zhang H, Wang W (1998). Reconstruction of three-dimensional digital teeth. Chin J Dent Res 1(2):2225.[Medline]
Haux R (1999). Medizinische Informatik. In: Medizinische Physik. Vol. 1. Bille J, Schlegel W, editors. Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 459484.
Okumura H, Chen L, Yokoe Y, Tsutsumi S, Oka M (1999). CAD/CAM fabrication of occlusal splints for orthognathic surgery. J Clin Orthod 33:231235.[Medline]
Pan S, Yin Y, Feng H (1999). Three-dimensional finite element analysis and comparison of stress distribution in overdentures supported with bar attachments and telescopic crowns. Chin J Dent Res 2(1):2130.
Sellen P, Jagger D, Harrison A (1998). Computer-generated study of the correlation between tooth, face, arch forms, and palatal contour. J Prosthet Dent 80:163168.[Medline]
Zhang X, Yang C, Gao J, Ding Z, (1998). Computer-assisted design and manufacture of posterior full crowns. Chin J Dent Res 1(3):3034.[Medline]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| IADR Journals | Advances in Dental Research ® | Journal of Dental Research ® | Critical Reviews (1990-2004) |