Report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

Abstract

Even this cursory examination of selected investigations clearly impresses the reviewer that dental research proceeds unabated, bolstered each year by an increasing army of scientists from other disciplines who are being enticed into the framework of research in this profession. The parameters of knowledge are being pushed forward and the future is an exciting one—both to the researcher and to the dentist who must eventually transpose these findings into service to the patient. I would take the liberty of speaking to this last point for one moment. At least five different committees here in the United States are concerned with the general problems coincident with the scientific manpower and growth in dental research and, in these deliberations, a salient fact has loomed. Today the greatest void in dental research, and a void which has existed for many years, lies in the area of clinical research. Laboratory data are meaningful only if it is eventually corroborated by well-controlled clinical studies. The walls between the scientist and the practicing dentist are rapidly disappearing, as evidenced by the changing pattern in the annual program of this Academy. Unfortunately, interest in clinical research has not remained apace with that evidenced in laboratory investigations. Furthermore, despite concerted efforts to train clinical researchers, the number of such individuals is woefully inadequate. Thus, I would extend a challenge, and a plea, to this organization to consider more strongly their responsibilities in this area. I say responsibilities because no other organized body in dentistry better commands the respect of all the profession and of the researcher, whether he is working on enamel solubility, caries, dental materials, pulp reactions, or neurophysiology. Clinical observations, which are meaningful, are dependent upon a well-controlled dental operation carried out in the hands of a meticulous and dedicated professional man. Surprisingly, such fertile environments are not plentiful. For that reason, laboratory data accumulate without the essential parallel clinical research. However, you, collectively as a group and as individuals, do represent the climate that is necessary for reliable clinical documentation of laboratory research. Therefore, I would envision that, within the structure of the innumerable study clubs which are represented by the members of this Academy and that within your own daily office regime, unlimited opportunities exist for a modest program of clinical research. Such possibilities might be explored. It appears to me that in the future the function of your Committee on Scientific Investigation could be altered in concept to serve not just passively in reviewing the literature each year but rather that this committee or the Council might explore the opportunities that exist for actively contributing to this constantly changing picture of dental practice. I suggest that the rewards are worthy of considered thought.