DTUK2910

A vila et al. state that the decision tree intro- duced “…was developed upon available scientific litera- ture”. This last phrase may be misleading to the general dental practitioner. The author of the current pa- per has written this paper to avoid confusion among the profession. Scientific papers published in peer reviewed journals should have a similar framework: • Introduction – to emphasise the topic / question / hypothesis raised by the paper. • Methods – to explain the ap- proach, topic / question that has been approached / studied / researched by the paper by an- swering the classic questions: who, what, why, when, and where. • Results – to describe the find- ings / results / answer and present them. • Discussion – to explain the importance / significance of the findings / answer and put in context with the evidence by analysing own methodology and compare with available data and knowledge; if need of further work has been identified this should be highlighted. • Conclusions – to conclude if results / findings / answer of the question introduced are applicable to. Accumulation of knowledge today is based on what informa- tion is supplied. Textbooks rep- resent an excellent resource of information. They will mostly update you on different concepts, techniques, and approaches. Ap- praisal of procedures, techniques and concepts can be performed based on scientific papers pub- lished in peer reviewed journals. Correct, comprehensive and adequate appraisal of the litera- ture is decisive for the outcome of contemporaneous papers. The paper published by Avi- la et al. in 2009: “A novel deci- sion – making process for tooth retention or extraction” in the JOP is intended as “…a reference guide for dentists when making the decision to save or extract a compromised tooth.” Who wrote this paper? The paper has been written by multiple authors with different backgrounds: 1. Periodontists: Gustavo Avila, Thiago Morelli, Stephen Soe- hren, Hom – Lay Wong. 2. Oral Surgeon: Pablo Galindo – Moreno. 3. Prosthodontist: Carl Misch. What is the goal? The authors’ intention was to of- fer “…a reference guide for den- tists when making the decision to save or extract a compromised tooth”. Why has this paper been published? Fast on-going research has ex- pended multiple fold treatments options in modern Dentistry: Bi- otissue - and Biofilm engineer- ing, three dimensional diagnosis (radiology), CAD CAM technique as well as dental materials en- sure more support for diseased hard and soft tissue. Reviewing treatability in the context of dis- ease stadium was the major goal of the paper. When was the paper published? The paper was published in Vol- ume 80 of The Journal of Period- ontology in 2009. It is of major importance for the general prac- titioner with limited time avail- abilities and a restrained access to the literature to be offered updated complex decision taking instruments. Where was the paper published? The paper has been published in the official organ of the Ameri- can Academy of Periodontology. The review methodology of this journal guarantees the highest professional confidence. 130 papers have been refer- enced by the authors. The ref- Appraising the true val- ue of Decision – Making Process for Tooth Retention or Extraction by Prof Dr med dent Liviu Steier page 12DTà Perio Tribune pages 21-22page 15-18 Liviu Steier takes a closer look at photo ac- tivated disinfection Howard Thomas discusses the effective- ness of mouthwash Application of PAD Washed away Perio Tribune Perio Tribune page 19-20 Helmut Nissen discusses interdental cleaning The next generation Perio Tribune ‘Correct, comprehensive and adequate ap- praisal of the literature is decisive for the outcome of contemporaneous papers’