Comparative Assessment of Modified Self-Reported Periodontal Risk Assessment Model and Periodontal Risk Assessment Model among the Adult Population.

Introduction: A high burden of periodontal diseases is seen in the adult population. Hence, it is important to monitor the risk and progression of periodontal diseases. Instead of using complex clinical periodontal risk assessment models, self-reported measures would be favorable for obtaining data in order to conduct research and surveillance of population over time on the progression of periodontitis. Our aim was to compare two tools for periodontal risk assessment, the originally described periodontal risk assessment (PRA) model given by Lang and Tonetti and the modified self-reported periodontal risk assessment model, in patients, depending upon can be changed to after. Materials and Methods: All the participants completed a questionnaire used for modified self-reported periodontal risk assessment model. Periodontal status of the participants was recorded using the periodontal risk assessment (PRA) model given by Lang and Tonetti. Results: Among 50 patients examined 28, 14, and eight were in low-, moderate-, high-risk groups, respectively, identified by self-reported periodontal risk assessment, whereas 34, 10, and six were in low-, moderate-, high-risk groups, respectively, when identified by the PRA model given by Lang and Tonetti. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve) showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.835, and it represents good predictability of self-reported periodontal risk assessment model. Conclusion: This is feasible method with self-reported measures; it is easier, of low cost, and requires less equipment for obtaining data for research and surveillance of the periodontal status of a population.

Periodontal risk assessment in a teaching hospital population in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province.

OBJECTIVE: With this cross-sectional study, we aimed to evaluate factors associated with moderate and high risk of periodontal disease (PD) progression in the Saudi population. METHODS: We reviewed 281 patients' clinical charts from predoctoral periodontal clinics at the dental teaching hospital in the College of Dentistry (COD) at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU) in Dammam, Saudi Arabia. After obtaining ethical approval, we determined the Periodontal Risk Assessment (PRA) of the included patients based on the modified criteria developed by Lang and Tonetti (2003). We used logistic regression on stratified data and divided the results into two categories (low-moderate and high risk) to assess the effect modifier for potential risk factors. We used SPSS version 22 for data analysis, and considered a P-value ≤ 0.05 to be statistically significant. RESULTS: Out of the 281 patients, 104 (37.0%) were male and 177 (63.0%) were female, with a mean age of 39.9 ± 14.0 years; 78.1% were Saudi nationals, 77% were married, and 44.6% were in the age group of 30 to 49. The PRA revealed 86 (30.5%) to represent high risk, 108 (38.3%) denoted moderate risk, and 88 (31.2%) signaled low risk for periodontitis. Logistic regression analysis showed that males were three times more likely to have high PRA (OR = 3.24) and to be married (OR = 2.77), as well as to be active smokers (OR = 8.87). The highest predictive factors of high PRA were 8 or more pockets ≥ 5 mm (OR = 29.0), those with active diabetes mellitus (DM; OR = 10.2), and those with 8 or more missing teeth (OR = 9.15). CONCLUSION: Saudi males who are married and have residual periodontal pockets, are actively diabetic, and with missing teeth are at high risk of PD. Further research is needed with a larger sample size comparing the general population with and without PD.

Assessing the completeness of periodontal disease documentation in the EHR: a first step in measuring the quality of care.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to measure the proportion of patients for which comprehensive periodontal charting, periodontal disease risk factors (diabetes status, tobacco use, and oral home care compliance), and periodontal diagnoses were documented in the electronic health record (EHR). We developed an EHR-based quality measure to assess how well four dental institutions documented periodontal disease-related information. An automated database script was developed and implemented in the EHR at each institution. The measure was validated by comparing the findings from the measure with a manual review of charts. RESULTS: The overall measure scores varied significantly across the four institutions (institution 1 = 20.47%, institution 2 = 0.97%, institution 3 = 22.27% institution 4 = 99.49%, p-value < 0.0001). The largest gaps in documentation were related to periodontal diagnoses and capturing oral homecare compliance. A random sample of 1224 charts were manually reviewed and showed excellent validity when compared with the data generated from the EHR-based measure (Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, and NPV > 80%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the feasibility of developing automated data extraction scripts using structured data from EHRs, and successfully implementing these to identify and measure the periodontal documentation completeness within and across different dental institutions.

Utilization of Periodontal Risk Assessment Tools in the Clinical Setting: Knowledge, attitudes and practice behaviors of dental hygienists.

Purpose: Identifying individuals at risk for developing periodontal disease helps to prevent, treat, and manage this condition. The purpose of this study was to explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors of dental hygienists regarding the use of periodontal risk assessment tools.Methods: This cross-sectional survey study used a convenience sample of dental hygienists recruited through social media and snowball sampling. The validated electronic survey included items related to demographics, knowledge, attitude, and practice behaviors regarding the use of periodontal risk assessment tools in the clinical setting. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data and outcomes were represented through frequencies and percentiles.Results: Two-hundred eighty-two of the respondents (n=282) (n=530) met the inclusion criteria, for a participation rate of 53%. A majority (88%) "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that periodontal risk assessment tools improve communication and increase educational opportunities with patients and 50% reported completing periodontal risk assessments during a patient's scheduled appointment. Significant relationships existed between "frequently" or "always" reviewing periodontal risk assessment outcomes and the participants age, place of employment and number of continuing education (CE) hours completed (p=0.004). Participants who were members of the American Dental Hygienists' Association (ADHA) were more likely to correctly answer three or more knowledge questions (p=0.01), and more likely to measure and record pocket depths in a periodontal risk assessment tool (p=0.005).Conclusion: Although dental hygienists reported periodontal risk assessment tools were helpful for patient communication and education, only 50% reported regular completion while providing patient care. Continuing education on the value of periodontal risk assessment tools and better understanding of the barriers to routine implementation, could expand their use.

Oral Disease Risk Assessment in Conjunction with Comprehensive Periodontal Care: A Case Report.

AIM: To illustrate the treatment of a complex periodontal disease patient utilizing oral disease risk assessment. BACKGROUND: Periodontal disease is multifactorial in nature and requires addressing multiple factors in order to manage it successfully. Maintenance care is crucial for a favorable outcome, and risk assessment may help formulate the most suitable treatment plan and maintenance program. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 37-year-old man presented at the clinic for comprehensive periodontal treatment prior to replacing his missing teeth. He was healthy but smoked 5-10 cigarettes per day. Based on the clinical and radiographic examinations, the patient had generalized advanced periodontitis with multiple caries lesions, defective fillings, and missing teeth. A comprehensive treatment plan was put for the patient and a detailed assessment of his periodontal disease and caries risk was performed. The patient was assigned as being of high risk for periodontal disease progression and of low-medium caries risk. Three months following execution of the proposed nonsurgical and surgical treatment procedures, the patient demonstrated notable improvement compared to the baseline and was put under a strict maintenance program every 3 months. CONCLUSION: The presented case illustrates how oral disease risk assessment measures may be incorporated within comprehensive management of a periodontitis patient. Recommending this approach remains a personal preference and is yet to be substantiated by evidence. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Incorporating risk assessment measures in daily clinical practice may prevent the onset and/or progression of future disease, reducing unnecessary effort and expenses, and should be evaluated by concerned policymakers.

Periodontal condition and periodontal risk assessment in adult patients with cystic fibrosis.

INTRODUCTION: The presence of chronic inflammation in the mouth, such as infectious disease of the periodontal tissues, may be the reservoir of microorganisms that are not usually present, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to create a profile of periodontal conditions and periodontal risk assessment in adult patients with cystic fibrosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study involved 22 patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) aged 29.43 years. The following parameters were included in the clinical study: number and cause of permanent teeth loss (excluding third molars), the presence of plaque (PCR), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL). On the basis of obtained clinical data, the periodontal status and the periodontal risk were determined. RESULTS: The study showed healthy periodontal tissues in 9 people (41%), gingivitis in 5 (23%), and mild periodontitis in 8 (36.36%). The periodontal risk in the vast majority of patients (90.91%) was at a low level - only 2 people, on average. CONCLUSIONS: The poor oral hygiene in CF patients indicates the need to develop standards of dental care for this group aimed at education and elimination of risk factors for oral diseases. The obtained results of clinical trials do not rule out the likelihood of auto-infections of the respiratory system originating from periodontal tissues, which, in CF patients, may adversely affect the general state of health and conducted therapy.

Comparison of two different periodontal risk assessment methods with regard to their agreement: Periodontal risk assessment versus periodontal risk calculator.

AIM: To evaluate the level of agreement between the periodontal risk assessment (PRA) and the periodontal risk calculator (PRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Periodontal risk was retrospectively assessed among 50 patients using PRA and PRC. Both methods were modified. PRA by assessing probing pocket depths and bleeding on probing at four (PRA4) and six (PRA6) sites per tooth, PRC by permanently marking or unmarking the dichotomously selectable factors "irregular recall," "oral hygiene in need of improvement" and "completed scaling and root planing" for PRC. Agreement between PRA and PRCred (summarized risk categories) was determined using weighted kappa. RESULTS: Fifty patients enrolled in periodontal maintenance (48% female, age: 63.8 ± 11.2 years) participated. PRA4 and PRA6 matched in 32 (64%) patients (κ-coefficient = 0.48, p < .001). There was 100% agreement between both PRC versions. There was minimal agreement of PRA6 and PRCred (66%, 28% one different category, 6% two different categories; κ-coefficient = 0.34; p = .001). PRA4 and PRCred did not match (60% agreement, 34% one different category, 6% two different categories; κ-coefficient = 0.23; p = .13). For the SPT diagnosis of severe periodontitis, PRA6 and PRCred agreed weakly (κ-coefficient = 0.44; p = .004). CONCLUSION: PRA and PRC showed a minimal agreement. Specific disease severity may result in improved agreement.

Changes of clinical parameters at implants: A retrospective comparison of implants versus natural teeth over 5 years of supportive periodontal therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical parameters of implants versus natural teeth over a period of 5 years during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 421 SPT patients were screened for implants (I) and corresponding control teeth (C). Data (patient level [P ]: sex, age, smoking status, systemic diseases, adherence, oral hygiene indices, mean probing depth [PD]P , bleeding on probing [BOP]P , periodontal risk profile; implant/control tooth level [I/C ]: PDI/C , BOPI/C ; site level at implants [SITE ]: position, dental arch, aspect, BOPSITE ) were assessed at the first SPT session where the implant was probed (T1) and 5 years later (T2). The influence of patient and implant/control-related factors on PDI/C /BOPI/C was tested (linear mixed model) as well as the influence of site-specific factors on the PDSITE change (multilevel regression). RESULTS: A total of 70 patients (151 implants) were included. Mean PDI was 2.75 ± 0.85 mm (T1) and 2.87 ± 0.79 mm (T2). Mean PDC was 2.42 ± 0.66 mm (T1) and 2.49 ± 0.71 mm (T2). BOPI increased from 8.62 ± 15.01% (T1) to 24.06 ± 26.79% (T2) and BOPC from 9.97 ± 17.78% (T1) to 15.52 ± 22.69% (T2). The differences between implants and controls were significant for BOP (p = .0032). At T2, BOPI/C was associated with periodontal risk (p = .0351). The site-specific analysis revealed an association of BOPSITE at T1 with the progression of PDSITE (p = .0058). CONCLUSIONS: Probing depths of implants and controls seem to change similarly during SPT but retention of inflammation-free conditions at implants appears to be more difficult compared to natural teeth. Patients with a high-risk profile appear to have an increased susceptibility for BOP around implants, and BOP at implants seems to be a predictor for further PD increase.

Predictive factors for tooth loss during supportive periodontal therapy in patients with severe periodontitis: a Japanese multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) must take individual patient risk factors into account. We conducted a multicenter joint retrospective cohort study to investigate the value of modified periodontal risk assessment (MPRA) and therapy-resistant periodontitis (TRP) assessment as predictive factors for tooth loss due to periodontal disease in patients with severe periodontitis during SPT. METHODS: The subjects were 82 patients from 11 dental institutions who were diagnosed with severe periodontitis and continued SPT for at least 1 year (mean follow-up = 4.9 years) between 1981 and 2008. The outcome was tooth loss due to periodontal disease during SPT. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze sex, age, diabetes status, smoking history, number of periodontal pockets measuring ≥6 mm, rate of bleeding on probing, bone loss/age ratio, number of teeth lost, MPRA, and TRP assessment as explanatory variables. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed that loss of ≥8 teeth by the start of SPT [hazard ratio (HR) 2.86], MPRA score indicating moderate risk (HR 8.73) or high risk (HR 11.04), and TRP assessment as poor responsiveness to treatment (HR 2.79) were significantly associated with tooth loss (p < 0.05). In a model in which the explanatory variables of an association that was statistically significant were added simultaneously, the HR for poor responsiveness to treatment and ≥8 teeth lost was significant at 20.17 compared with patients whose TRP assessment indicated that they responded favorably to treatment and who had lost <8 teeth by the start of SPT. CONCLUSION: MPRA and TRP assessment may be useful predictive factors for tooth loss due to periodontal disease during SPT in Japanese patients with severe periodontitis. Additionally, considering the number of teeth lost by the start of SPT in TRP assessment may improve its predictive accuracy.

Oral health-related quality of life in patients under supportive periodontal therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the oral health-related quality of life (OH-QoL) in patients under supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) and the influence of the individual periodontal risk as well as different degrees of adherence during SPT on OH-QoL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 309 patients with at least 5 years of SPT were re-examined. Periodontal risk profile (according to Lang and Tonetti) was assessed and the adherence to SPT-appointments within the last 30(±6) months was reviewed for each patient (fully adherent: adherence to all appointments ±6 weeks, partially adherent: SPT-interval not extended more than half of the recommended interval, insufficiently adherent: SPT-interval extended more than half of the recommended interval, non-adherent: recommended SPT-interval interruption ≥12 months). OH-QoL was measured using the German short-version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-G14). Differences between groups (Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test), association between total OHIP-scores and the predictors age, mean periodontal probing depth and oral hygiene parameters were tested (Spearman's correlation). A multivariable linear regression model was fitted using all categorical predictors with a univariable p value <.1. RESULTS: Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in OHIP-G14 scores for gender, periodontal diagnosis and prosthetic status. Patients with deep periodontal pockets (≥6 mm) showed significantly higher OHIP-G14 scores compared to patients without deep pockets (p = .049). Adherence and periodontal surgery were statistically significant predictors for the OHIP-G14 score. CONCLUSIONS: OH-QoL of patients under long-term SPT seems to be influenced by periodontal status. Good compliance with SPT-intervals based on the individual periodontal risk profile seems to contribute to a better OH-QoL compared to irregular attendance of SPT.

Estudo coorte prospectivo em terapia de manutenção periodontal: análise de parâmetros clínicos periodontais, progressão de periodontite, perda dentária e de modelo multifuncional para avaliação do risco periodontal / Prospective cohort study in periodontal maintenance therapy: analysis of clinical periodontal parameters, progression of periodontitis, tooth loss and multifunctionmodel for periodontal risk assessment

Este estudo de coorte aberto prospectivo teve como objetivo avaliar a progressão da periodontite, a influência de variáveis preditoras de risco e avaliar a incidência e motivos para a ocorrência de perda dentária (PD) em indivíduos inseridos num programa de terapia de manutenção periodontal (TMP) em ambiente universitário. Metodologia: 250 indivíduos com diagnóstico de periodontite crônica moderadaavançada, que finalizaram terapia periodontal ativa foram recrutados na Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Todos foram submetidos a um exame clínico periodontal completo (TMP1) e a uma coleta de variáveis sociais, demográficas e biológicas de interesse. Avaliou-se o grau de cooperação destes indivíduos (cooperadores, cooperadores irregulares e não cooperadores) quanto à adesão ao programa de TMP em re-chamadas trimestrais (TMP2, TMP3 e TMP4) pelo período de 12 meses. Assim, 150 indivíduos considerados cooperadores completos (60%) foram elegíveis para esta pesquisa. Em todas as re-chamadas foram coletados os seguintes dados: índice de placa (IP), sangramento a sondagem (SS), profundidade de sondagem (PS), níveis clínicos de inserção (NCI), supuração (S) e envolvimento de furca (EF), em todos dentes presentes (com exceção de terceiros molares). Identificou-se, pela plausibilidade biológica, quais variáveis preditoras de risco poderiam influenciar a condição clínica periodontal e a progressão da periodontite. O efeito de variáveis de interesse e confundimentofoi testado por análise univariada e regressão logística multivariada, assim como motivos e tipos de dentes perdidos. Resultados: Observou-se uma melhora considerável nos parâmetros clínicos periodontais na maioria dos indivíduos. Durante o período de monitoramento, 130 indivíduos (86,7%) tiveram estabilidade periodontal e 20 indivíduos (13,3%) apresentaram progressão de periodontite. Diabetes não foi associada à progressão de periodontite (p=0,67) e o tabagismo foi significantemente associado a maior progressão de periodontite (RC=2,7; 95% IC: 1,01-7,22). 28 indivíduos (18,66%) apresentaram perda dentária os quais somaram 47 dentes perdidos (1,4%). Os motivos e números de dentes perdidos foram respectivamente: doença periodontal (n=34; 72,3%), cárie (n=3; 6,4%), motivos protéticos (n=9; 19,2%), perfuração radicular (n=1; 2,1%). Molares apresentaram maior mortalidade dental do que não molares e homens 3 vezes mais chances de PD do que mulheres (RC=3,16; 95% IC: 1,28-7,78). Indivíduos com 10% de sítios com PS entre 4 e 6 mm apresentaram 5 vezes mais chances de PD (RC= 5,13; IC 95%: 2,04-12,09). A determinação do risco individual pelo modelo ARP (Avaliação do Risco Periodontal) resultou na classificação dos indivíduos em 02(1,3%) de baixo risco, 83 (55,3%) de moderado risco e 65 (43,4%) de alto risco àrecorrência de periodontite. Conclusões: Os programas de manutenção periodontalem ambiente universitário podem estabilizar a condição periodontal obtida apósterapia ativa e, adicionalmente, controlar e/ou minimizar a ação de variáveispreditoras de risco a progressão da periodontite. Neste estudo, a incidência de PDfoi pequena e restrita a poucos indivíduos. A adoção do modelo ARP contribui para adeterminação do risco individual dos indivíduos, permitindo que os escores de riscosejam comparados ao longo do tempo. Assim, este instrumento pode ser válido paramonitorar particularmente variáveis mutáveis de risco e auxiliar na estratégia,determinação e cooperação nos programas de TMP. A estabilidade dos tecidosperiodontais, controle de variáveis de risco e redução da PD podem ser metasalcançáveis pelos programas de TMP, refletindo a sua eficiência e propiciandomelhor qualidade de vida para indivíduos periodontalmente susceptíveis

This open prospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the progression of periodontitisand, in addition, the incidence, the reasons and the role of risk predictors on theoccurrence of tooth loss (TL) in individuals inserted in a program of periodontalmaintenance therapy (PMT) in academic environment. Methods: 250 individualsdiagnosed with moderate/advanced chronic periodontitis, that had finished activeperiodontal therapy, in the Faculty of Dentistry of the Federal University of MinasGerais, Brazil, were selected. Individuals were submitted to a complete clinicalperiodontal examination (PMT1) and collection of social, demographic and biologicalvariables of interest was performed. The degree of compliance of these individuals,(compliers, irregular compliers and non compliers) according to the adhesion to theTMP program in quarterly recalls (PMT2, PMT3 and PMT4), was evaluated during 12months period. A total of 150 individuals, that were considered complete compliers(60%), became eligible for this study. In the recall visits, the following data werecollected for all teeth (with exception of third molars): plaque index (PI), bleeding onprobing (BOP), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), suppuration (SU)and furcation involvement (FI). It was identified, according to the biologicalplausibility, which risk predictors could influence the periodontal clinical condition andthe progression of the periodontitis. The effect of variables of interest andconfounding was tested by univariate analysis and multivaried logistic regression, aswell as the reasons and types of teeth that were lost. Results: A considerableimprovement in periodontal clinical parameters was observed in the majority of theindividuals. During the monitoring, 130 individuals (86.7%) showed periodontalstability and 20 individuals (13.3%) presented periodontitis progression. Diabeteswas not associated with periodontitis progression (p=0.67) and, in contrast, smokingwas significantly associated with periodontitis progression (OR=2.7; 95% IC 1.01-7.22). 28 individuals (18.66%) presented TL, resulting in a total of 47 lost teeth(1.4%). The reasons and numbers of tooth loss and numbers were, respectively:periodontal disease (n=34; 72.3%), caries (n=3; 6.4%), prosthetic reasons (n=9;19.2%), root perforation (n=1; 2.1%). Molars presented greater tooth mortality thannon molars and men presented 3 times more odds of TL than women (OR=3.16;95% IC: 1.28-7.78). Additionally, individuals with 10% of sites with PD between 4 and6mm presented 5 times more odds of TL (OR= 5.13; IC 95%: 2.04 ­ 12.09). Theperiodontal risk assessment (PRA) resulted in the classification of individuals in 02(1.3%) low risk, 83 (55.3%) moderate risk and 65 (43.4%) of high-risk for recurrenceof periodontitis. Conclusions: The programmes of periodontal maintenance inacademic environment can stabilize the periodontal condition obtained after activetherapy, additionally to control and/or minimize the action of risk predictors on theprogression of periodontitis. In this study, the TL incidence was small and restrictedto few individuals. The adoption of the model PRA contributes to the determination ofrisk of individuals allowing the risk scores are compared over time. So, thisinstrument can be particularly monitoring changeable risk predictors and assisting inthe strategy, determination and compliance in the PMT programs. The stability ofperiodontal sites, the control of risk predictors and the reduction of TL can bepredictable goals for the PMT programs, reflecting its effectiveness and betterimproving quality of life for individuals susceptible to periodontitis