Faculty Bibliography

Corporations as well as individual professionals have an ethical obligation to help those in need. There is a sound tradition in American business for companies including social outreach as part of business strategy. This approach works best when corporations and community and professional experts work in partnership. Henry Schein's Corporate Social Responsibility program contributes expertise, logistics, connections, and funds to these partnerships in the United States and worldwide.

The focus of healthcare ethics within the framework of ethical principles and philosophical foundations has always, in recent times, been the community, namely, the healthcare provider, the patient or, in research, the study participant. An initiative is thus described whereby a community of practice (CoP) model was developed around health ethics in health research, education and clinical care. The ethics curriculum was redesigned to include several components that are integrated and all embracing, namely, health research ethics, healthcare ethics, health personnel education in ethics and global and public health ethics. A CoP is a group who share a common interest and a desire to learn from and contribute to the community with their variety of experiences. The CoP is dynamic and organic, generating knowledge that can be translated into effective healthcare delivery and ethical research. It requires the collaboration and social presence of active participants such as community members, healthcare professionals and educators, ethicists and policy makers to benefit the community by developing approaches that adapt to and resonate with the community and its healthcare needs. Philosophical principles constitute the foundation or underpinning of this innovative curriculum. Recommendations are presented that will continue to guide the consolidation and sustainability of the CoP. (c) 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Data from clinical studies generated by Practice Based Research Networks should be generalizable to the profession. For nationally representative data a broad recruitment of practitioners may pose added risks to IRB's. Infrastructure must assure data integrity while minimizing risk to assure that the clinical results are generalizable. The PEARL Network is an interdisciplinary dental/medical PBRN conducting a broad range of clinical studies. The infrastructure is designed to support the principles of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and create a data audit trail to ensure data integrity for generalizability. As the PBRN concept becomes of greater interest, membership may expand beyond the local community, and the issue of geography versus risk management becomes of concern to the IRB. The PEARL Network describes how it resolves many of the issues related to recruiting on a National basis while maintaining study compliance to ensure patient safety and minimize risk to the IRB.

Biotechnological advances in the rapid diagnostic testing of oral fluids such as saliva and oral transudate have led to the identification of numerous biomarkers and may change the scope of dental care and research policy. However, addressing the ethical, legal, and social challenges is not clear-cut. The United States has no comprehensive regulatory framework governing the use of oral fluid biospecimens and biobanking such as those for blood. Individuals who provide blanket consent do not meet the definition of informed consent because individuals do not have full information about the future use of their oral fluid biospecimens; therefore, alternative forms of consent should include a tiered process. What are the strategies that need to be implemented for minimizing disclosure of confidential information while maximizing the social value of research? Because research with oral fluid biospecimens may lead to therapeutic modalities that have commercial value, what guidelines should be in place regarding proposed legal ownership and property rights? Social repercussions are likely when the public sends salivary samples to direct-to-consumer personal genome companies. A different regulatory framework for the management of oral fluid specimens may thus be needed

This paper is structured around the following: autonomy and consent, confidentiality, disclosure, knowledge of patient and provider HIV status, the right to choose whom to treat, testing for HIV and the importance of HIV policies in the workplace to guard against discrimination. The emergence of the HIV/AIDS pandemic has challenged traditional ethical values of the health care profession. These include the infectious nature of HIV, the social stigma of the disease and its ethical and legal dilemmas. This paper addresses some of the pertinent questions related to HIV infection and AIDS. The three broad principles of ethics, namely, autonomy, beneficence and justice, provide the basic framework on which this paper is based. Advances in the biotechnology of rapid oral fluid testing particularly in the detection of HIV antibodies from patients in the dental setting have raised additional ethical and legal considerations in the subsequent management of HIV infected patients to include disclosure of test results to the patient and proper referral to physicians or nurse practitioners. The oral health care worker must thus have a solid foundation in the application of bioethical principles. A clinical case scenario related to HIV testing in the dental setting is presented to illustrate how a lack of understanding and the wrongful application of ethical principles may lead to patient harm and legal liability. Given the increasing infection rate of HIV worldwide, polices must be upheld and revised as needed to protect healthcare providers, patients, and society generally against discrimination.

BACKGROUND: More than 1 million individuals in the U.S. are infected with HIV; approximately 20% of whom do not know they are infected. Early diagnosis of HIV infection results in earlier access to treatment and reductions in HIV transmission. In 2006, the CDC recommended that health care providers offer routine HIV screening to all adolescent and adult patients, regardless of community seroprevalence or patient lifestyle. Dental providers are uniquely positioned to implement these recommendations using rapid oral fluid HIV screening technology. However, thus far, uptake into dental practice has been very limited. METHODS: The study utilized a qualitative descriptive approach with convenience samples of dental faculty and students. Six in-depth one-on-one interviews were conducted with dental faculty and three focus groups were conducted with fifteen dental students. RESULTS: Results were fairly consistent and indicated relatively high levels of acceptability. Barriers and facilitators of oral fluid HIV screening were identified in four primary areas: scope of practice/practice enhancement, skills/knowledge/training, patient service/patient reactions and logistical issues. CONCLUSIONS: Oral fluid HIV screening was described as having benefits for patients, dental practitioners and the public good. Many of the barriers to implementation that were identified in the study could be addressed through training and interdisciplinary collaborations.

In this case a young dentist has signed onto a managed care plan that has several attractive features. Eventually, however, he notices that he makes little or no net revenue for some of the work that he does. A colleague recommends that he use different labs for different patients, with labs matched to each patient's dental plan and coverage. Offshore labs are used for managed care patients. Three knowledgeable experts comment on the case, two with many years of private practice experience, two who are dental educators holding master's degrees in philosophy and bioethics.