The Oral Health Statistical Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies and Clinical Trials in Oral Health Research: Manuscript Checklist.

Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising published research. Yet, ample evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research-statisticians and trialists from academia and industry-identified the minimum information needed to report and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the Oral Health Statistical (OHStat) Guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to Task Force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The guidelines were subsequently revised by the Task Force's writing group. The guidelines draw heavily from the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), and Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials harms guidelines and incorporate the SAMPL guidelines for reporting statistics, the CLIP principles for documenting images, and the GRADE indicating the quality of evidence. The guidelines also recommend reporting estimates in clinically meaningful units using confidence intervals, rather than relying on P values. In addition, OHStat introduces 7 new guidelines that concern the text itself, such as checking the congruence between abstract and text, structuring the discussion, and listing conclusions to make them more specific. OHStat does not replace other reporting guidelines; it incorporates those most relevant to dental researches into a single document. Manuscripts using the OHStat guidelines will provide more information specific to oral health research.

The Oral Health Statistics Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies and Clinical Trials in Oral Health Research: Explanation and Elaboration.

Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising research. Yet, evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research-statisticians and trialists from academia and industry-empaneled a group of authors to develop methodological and statistical reporting guidelines identifying the minimum information needed to document and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the Oral Health Statistics Guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to task force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The final version was subsequently approved by the task force in September 2021, submitted for journal review in 2022, and revised in 2023. The checklist consists of 48 guidelines: 5 for introductory information, 17 for methods, 13 for statistical analysis, 6 for results, and 7 for interpretation; 7 are specific to clinical trials. Each of these guidelines identifies relevant information, explains its importance, and often describes best practices. The checklist was published in multiple journals. The article was published simultaneously in JDR Clinical and Translational Research, the Journal of the American Dental Association, and the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Completed checklists should accompany manuscripts submitted for publication to these and other oral health journals to help authors, journal editors, and reviewers verify that the manuscript provides the information necessary to adequately document and evaluate the research.

The OHStat Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies and Clinical Trials in Oral Health Research: manuscript checklist.

Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising published research. Yet, ample evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research-statisticians and trialists from academia and industry-identified the minimum information needed to report and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the OHStat Guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to Task Force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The guidelines were subsequently revised by the Task Force's writing group. The guidelines draw heavily from the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), and CONSORT harms guidelines and incorporate the SAMPL guidelines for reporting statistics, the CLIP principles for documenting images, and the GRADE indicating the quality of evidence. The guidelines also recommend reporting estimates in clinically meaningful units using confidence intervals, rather than relying on P values. In addition, OHStat introduces 7 new guidelines that concern the text itself, such as checking the congruence between abstract and text, structuring the discussion, and listing conclusions to make them more specific. OHStat does not replace other reporting guidelines; it incorporates those most relevant to dental research into a single document. Manuscripts using the OHStat guidelines will provide more information specific to oral health research.

The OHStat Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies and Clinical Trials in Oral Health Research: explanation and elaboration.

Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising research. Yet, evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research-statisticians and trialists from academia and industry-empaneled a group of authors to develop methodological and statistical reporting guidelines identifying the minimum information needed to document and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the OHstat Guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to Task Force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The final version was subsequently approved by the Task Force in September 2021, submitted for journal review in 2022, and revised in 2023. The checklist consists of 48 guidelines: 5 for introductory information, 17 for methods, 13 for statistical analysis, 6 for results, and 7 for interpretation; 7 are specific to clinical trials. Each of these guidelines identifies relevant information, explains its importance, and often describes best practices. The checklist was published in multiple journals. The article was published simultaneously in JDR Clinical and Translational Research, the Journal of the American Dental Association, and the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Completed checklists should accompany manuscripts submitted for publication to these and other oral health journals to help authors, journal editors, and reviewers verify that the manuscript provides the information necessary to adequately document and evaluate the research.

Harvest graft substitute for soft tissue volume augmentation around existing implants: A randomized, controlled and blinded multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Using a single-blind, randomized, controlled, multicenter, practice-based clinical trial, a volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) was compared with connective tissue graft (CTG) for soft tissue augmentation around existing dental implants. METHODS: Sixty patients (31 VCMX and 31 CTG) were included. The primary outcome was a soft tissue thickness change 3 mm below the gingival margin (GM). Secondary outcomes included clinical measures, such as keratinized tissue widths (KTw), probing pocket depths, and pink esthetic scores, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO). RESULTS: There were no significant differences between test and control patient demographics or clinical measures throughout the 1-year study. VCMX "grafts" were by design larger than CTG, and surgery time was less (27% less, p = 0.0005). Three millimeters below the GM (primary endpoint), tissue thickness increase was noninferior for VCMX compared with CTG (0.93 ± 0.80 mm vs. 1.10 ± 0.51 mm, respectively), inferior (by 0.25 mm) at 1 mm, and noninferior at 5 mm. Postoperative pain was significantly less for VCMX patients (p < 0.0001), but all other PRO measures, including esthetics and satisfaction, improved similarly for both therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Given the inclusion criteria for this study, namely soft tissue augmentation around existing implants with some evidence of KTw and minimal recession, VCMX provided soft tissue thickness and volume increases similar (noninferior) to CTG. Clinical measures and PRO were similar between therapies-site sensitivity and esthetics improved similarly for both therapies-but surgery time and pain following surgery were significantly less for VCMX.

A comparison of Er,Cr:YSGG laser to minimally invasive surgical technique in the treatment of intrabony defects: Twelve-month results of a multicenter, randomized, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this publication is to report on the 12-month clinical and radiographic results comparing the surgical use of the Er,Cr:YSGG laser (ERL) and minimally invasive surgical technique (MIST) for the treatment of intrabony defects in subjects with generalized periodontitis stage III, grade B. METHODS: Fifty-three adult subjects (29 females and 24 males; 19-73 years) with 79 intrabony defects were randomized following scaling and root planing (SRP) to receive ERL monotherapy (n = 27) or MIST (n = 26). Fifty subjects completed the study. Recession (REC), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), treatment time, and standardized radiographs were assessed and compared for each treatment group. Clinical measurements were recorded at baseline, 4-6 weeks following SRP, and 6 and 12 months following surgical therapy. Radiographic results were compared to baseline at 6 and 12 months following surgical therapy. RESULTS: The following primary and secondary outcome variables were non-inferior with the following margins: CAL with a non-inferiority margin of 0.7 mm (p = 0.05), PD with a non-inferiority margin of 0.7 mm (p = 0.05), and REC with a non-inferiority margin of 0.4 mm (p = 0.05). Standardized radiographs suggest similar bone fill of 1.14 ± 1.73 mm for MIST and 1.12 ± 1.52 mm for ERL. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multicenter, randomized, masked, and controlled study demonstrating the ERL is not inferior to MIST at 12 months in terms of clinical outcomes and similar to MIST in terms of radiographic bone fill for the surgical treatment of intrabony defects.

American Academy of Periodontology best evidence consensus statement on the use of biologics in clinical practice.

A biologic is a therapeutic agent with biological activity that is administered to achieve an enhanced regenerative or reparative effect. The use of biologics has progressively become a core component of contemporary periodontal practice. However, some questions remain about their safety, indications, and effectiveness in specific clinical scenarios. Given their availability for routine clinical use and the existing amount of related evidence, the goal of this American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) best evidence consensus (BEC) was to provide a state-of-the-art, evidence-based perspective on the therapeutic application of autologous blood-derived products (ABPs), enamel matrix derivative (EMD), recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor BB (rhPDGF-BB), and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2). A panel of experts with extensive knowledge on the science and clinical application of biologics was convened. Three systematic reviews covering the areas of periodontal plastic surgery, treatment of infrabony defects, and alveolar ridge preservation/reconstruction and implant site development were conducted a priori and provided the foundation for the deliberations. The expert panel debated the merits of published data and exchanged experiential information to formulate evidence-based consensus statements and recommendations for clinical practice and future research. Based on an analysis of the current evidence and expert opinion, the panel concluded that the appropriate use of biologics in periodontal practice is generally safe and provides added benefits to conventional treatment approaches. However, therapeutic benefits and risks range based on the specific biologics used as well as patient-related local and systemic factors. Given the limited evidence available for some indications (e.g., gingival augmentation therapy, alveolar ridge preservation/reconstruction, and implant site development), future clinical studies that can expand the knowledge base on the clinical use of biologics in periodontal practice are warranted.

A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Evaluation of Extraction Socket Management Comparing a Wound Dressing and a Soft Tissue Substitute.

Postextraction bone grafting and implant placement help preserve alveolar bone volume. Collagen wound dressings and soft tissue graft substitutes may help protect extraction socket bone grafts and provide better gingival contours. This randomized, controlled, multicenter, and double-blinded study was conducted to compare a control (wound dressing) and a test (soft tissue graft) substitute in nearly intact extraction sockets. Both test and control sockets were grafted with a xenogeneic bone graft. Graft containment, extraction socket soft tissue gap closure, gingival contour, and gingival thickness were examined over 16 weeks, at which time implants were placed. Healing was uneventful for both groups, and there was no significant difference (P < .05) between the times required to close the extraction socket soft tissue gap (~80% of sites closed by 8 weeks). Bone grafts were covered and contained longer in the test group (~4 weeks vs ~2 weeks), with less contour disruption out to 4 weeks; however, at implant placement, soft tissue contours in both groups were comparable, and soft tissue thicknesses were not significantly different.

Efficacy of a harvest graft substitute for recession coverage and soft tissue volume augmentation: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The autogenous connective tissue graft (CTG) with coronally advanced flap (CTG+CAF) is the "gold standard" for recession defect coverage; however, researchers continue to pursue lower morbidity, more convenient and unlimited supply harvest graft substitutes, including those that could provide soft tissue volume augmentation. METHODS: A randomized, controlled, double-masked comparison of a volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) versus CTG was conducted at four clinical investigation sites. Single, contralateral, within patient matched-pair, RT1 recession defects were treated with VCMX+CAF (test) and CTG+CAF (control). The primary efficacy end point was percent root coverage at 6 months. Secondary efficacy end points included clinical measures such as soft tissue volume, attachment level, and keratinized tissue width. Patient-reported outcomes included measures such as discomfort, esthetics, and overall satisfaction; 6-month end point results were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: Thirty patients received control and test therapies, and all patients were available for follow-up measures. Average percent root coverage for CTG+CAF was 90.5% ± 14.87% versus 70.7% ± 28.26% for VCMX+CAF, P <0.0001. Both therapies produced significant soft tissue volume increases (84.8 ± 47.43 mm3 control versus 48.90 ± 35.58 mm3 test, P = 0.0006). The test, harvest graft substitute produced less postoperative pain and was preferred by patients at the 6-month end point. All other end point measures were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: VCMX+CAF root coverage was inferior to CTG+CAF but produced less morbidity and was preferred by patients. Case/patient selection and surgical technique appear key to achieving successful results with the harvest graft alternative.

Randomized, controlled, clinical trial to evaluate a xenogeneic collagen matrix as an alternative to free gingival grafting for oral soft tissue augmentation: A 6- to 8-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this follow up study was to determine if a xenogeneic collagen matrix (CMX) is as effective as free gingival graft (FGG) in preventing further recession 6+ years following vestibuloplasty. METHODS: This study was a single-blind (examiner), randomized, controlled, split-mouth study of 30 subjects with insufficient zones of KT (< 2 mm), associated with at least two, paired teeth. The study utilized a within subject treatment comparison to examine non-inferiority according to primary and secondary endpoints 6+ years after therapy. The original study primary efficacy endpoint was keratinized tissue width (KTw); however, in this report, prevention of recession (Rec) was also examined, along with traditional, secondary clinical measures, histopathology of mucosal biopsies and exploratory, patient reported outcomes (PROs) for pain and satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 23 of the 30 original, study patients were available for 6 to 8-year postoperative assessment, and these patients were representative of the original patient population. For preventing further Rec, CMX was not inferior to FGG (ΔRec = -0.07 ± 1.26 mm for CMX and -0.17 ± 0.78 mm for FGG, P = 0.710). There were no adverse results observed, and histological assessment indicated normal, keratinized gingiva for both therapies. Tissue texture and color match to surrounding, native tissues were significantly better for CMX, and patients preferred CMX over FGG therapy. CONCLUSIONS: CMX appears to be a suitable substitute for FGG 6+ years after therapy.

Comparison of Er,Cr:YSGG laser to minimally invasive surgical technique in the treatment of intrabony defects: Six-month results of a multicenter, randomized, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this publication is to report on the six-month clinical results and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) comparing the surgical use of the erbium, chromium-doped: yttrium, scandium, gallium, and garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser (ERL) and minimally invasive surgical technique (MIST) for the treatment of intrabony defects in subjects with generalized periodontitis stage III, grade B. METHODS: Fifty-three adults (29 females and 24 males; aged 19 to 73 years) with 79 intrabony defects were randomized following scaling and root planing (SRP) to receive ERL monotherapy (n = 27) or MIST (n = 26). Recession, probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), treatment time, and PROs were assessed and compared for each treatment group. Clinical measurements were recorded at baseline, 4 to 6 weeks following SRP, and 6 months following surgical therapy. RESULTS: The following primary and secondary outcome variables were non-inferior with the following margins: CAL with a non-inferiority margin of 0.6 mm (p = 0.05), PD with a non-inferiority margin of 0.5 mm (p = 0.05). Recession with a non-inferiority margin of 0.4 mm (p = 0.05). Faster procedure times were found for ERL (16.39 ± 6.21 minutes) versus MIST (20.17 ± 5.62 minutes), p = 0.0002. In the first 2 to 3 days of post-therapeutic diary outcomes, subjects reported less bruising, facial swelling, and use of ice pack for the ERL group. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multicenter, randomized, masked, and controlled study demonstrating the ERL is not inferior to MIST in terms of clinical outcomes but is superior in PROs for the surgical treatment of intrabony defects.

Reporting quality and spin in abstracts of randomized clinical trials of periodontal therapy and cardiovascular disease outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Poor reporting in randomized clinical trial (RCT) abstracts reduces quality and misinforms readers. Spin, a biased presentation of findings, could frequently mislead clinicians to accept a clinical intervention despite non-significant primary outcome. Therefore, good reporting practices and absence of spin enhances research quality. We aim to assess the reporting quality and spin in abstracts of RCTs evaluating the effect of periodontal therapy on cardiovascular (CVD) outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and 17 trial registration platforms were searched. Cohort, non-randomized, non-English studies, and pediatric studies were excluded. RCT abstracts were reviewed by 2 authors using the CONSORT for abstracts and spin checklists for data extraction. Cohen's Kappa statistic was used to assess inter-rater agreement. Data on the selected RCT publication metrics were collected. Descriptive analysis was performed with non-parametric methods. Correlation analysis between quality, spin and bibliometric parameters was conducted. RESULTS: 24 RCTs were selected for CONSORT analysis and 14 fulfilled the criteria for spin analysis. Several important RCT elements per CONSORT were neglected in the abstract including description of the study population (100%), explicitly stated primary outcome (87%), methods of randomization and blinding (100%), trial registration (87%). No RCT examined true outcomes (CVD events). A significant fraction of the abstracts appeared with at least one form of spin in the results and conclusions (86%) and claimed some treatment benefit in spite of non-significant primary outcome (64%). High-quality reporting had a significant positive correlation with reporting of trial registration (p = 0.04) and funding (p = 0.009). Spinning showed marginal negative correlation with reporting quality (p = 0.059). CONCLUSION: Poor adherence to the CONSORT guidelines and high levels of data spin were found in abstracts of RCTs exploring the effects of periodontal therapy on CVD outcomes. Our findings indicate that journal editors and reviewers should consider strict adherence to proper reporting guidelines to improve reporting quality and reduce waste.

Peri-implantitis Treatment Using Er:YAG Laser and Bone Grafting. A Prospective Consecutive Case Series Evaluation: 1 Year Posttherapy.

An effective treatment regime for peri-implantitis (P-I) should include disinfection and regeneration of peri-implant tissues. Twenty consecutive patients exhibiting 23 P-I implants with 84 deep (≥ 6 mm) defects were treated using an Er:YAG laser for implant surface decontamination, removal of defect granulomatous tissues, and grafting therapy for bony defect resolution. Probing pocket defects (PPD) ≥ 6 mm (deep probing depths) before surgery were reduced on average to approximately 3.5 mm at 12 months. Probing depths < 6 mm (shallow probing depths) remained stable (mean PPD 3.2 mm at 12 months). Radiographs indicated PPD reductions were achieved along with peri-implant defect fill.

Dental patients' self-reported use of dietary supplements on medical history questionnaires.

Dietary supplement effects and drug interactions can lead to significant adverse health events, thus potentially impacting the safe delivery of oral healthcare. This study sought to determine the frequency of, and factors impacting, dietary supplement use among 209 dental patients and whether the design of a medical history questionnaire influences reporting of supplement use. Patients were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups in which they completed either a standard medical history questionnaire (n = 107) or the same questionnaire with an additional item about dietary supplement use (n = 102). All patients were then administered a survey with questions about their demographics, their use and knowledge of dietary supplements, and the person or persons who recommended dietary supplement use to the patient. While 62% of the total population (130/209) reported supplement use, specific prompting nearly doubled the number of supplements reported (mean with prompting: 1.53; mean without prompting: 0.76; P < 0.0001). Patients younger than 30 years of age reported significantly less dietary supplement use than all other age groups except the 30-40 age group (P = 0.0003). An estimated 70% of all respondents were not aware of potentially detrimental side effects of dietary supplement use or possible interactions with conventional drug therapies. Since patients tended to report a greater use of dietary supplements when specifically asked about their use on a medical history questionnaire, a checklist or set of designated questions may be a suitable first step toward gathering this essential information.

Meta-analysis of the effect of an essential oil-containing mouthrinse on gingivitis and plaque.

BACKGROUND: Standard recommendations for oral hygiene practices have focused on mechanical methods (toothbrushing and interdental cleaning). Published evidence indicates antimicrobial mouthrinses provide oral health benefits beyond mechanical methods alone. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the combined effectiveness of mechanical methods with essential oil-containing mouthrinses (MMEO) versus mechanical methods (MM) alone in achieving site-specific, healthy gingival tissue and reducing plaque and gingivitis. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: All industry-sponsored clinical trials investigating the antigingivitis and antiplaque effects of essential oil (EO)-containing mouthrinses conducted from 1980 to 2012 were reviewed; 29 of 32 studies met the inclusion criteria of 6 months or longer duration, randomized, observer-masked, placebo-controlled, and with individual-level site-specific data. By-study treatment effects were estimated through generalized linear models for binary data and analysis of covariance for continuous data, and then combined using standard meta-analysis techniques; heterogeneity was also assessed. RESULTS: Summary odds ratios for a healthy gingival site and for a plaque-free site were, respectively, 5.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3-7.5) and 7.8 (95% CI, 5.4-11.2) for MMEO participants versus MM participants at 6 months. The summary percentage reductions in whole-mouth mean gingivitis and plaque at 6 months were 16.0 (95% CI, 11.3-20.7) and 27.7 (95% CI, 22.4-32.9), respectively. Responder analyses using aggregate individual-level data showed 44.8% of MMEO participants and 14.4% of MM participants achieved at least 50% healthy sites in their mouths at 6 months. Similarly, 36.9% of MMEO participants and 5.5% of MM participants achieved at least 50% plaque-free sites in their mouths at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This is the first meta-analysis to demonstrate the clinically significant, site-specific benefit of adjunctive EO treatment in people within a 6-month period (that is, between dental visits).

Systematic review and meta-analysis on the nonsurgical treatment of chronic periodontitis by means of scaling and root planing with or without adjuncts.

BACKGROUND: Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on nonsurgical treatment of patients with chronic periodontitis by means of scaling and root planing (SRP) with or without adjuncts. METHODS: A panel of experts convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs conducted a search of PubMed (MEDLINE) and Embase for randomized controlled trials of SRP with or without the use of adjuncts with clinical attachment level (CAL) outcomes in trials at least 6 months in duration and published in English through July 2014. The authors assessed individual study bias by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and conducted meta-analyses to obtain the summary effect estimates and their precision and to assess heterogeneity. The authors used funnel plots and Egger tests to assess publication bias when there were more than 10 studies. The authors used a modified version of the US Preventive Services Task Force methods to assess the overall level of certainty in the evidence. RESULTS: The panel included 72 articles on the effectiveness of SRP with or without the following: systemic antimicrobials, a systemic host modulator (subantimicrobial-dose doxycycline), locally delivered antimicrobials (chlorhexidine chips, doxycycline hyclate gel, and minocycline microspheres), and a variety of nonsurgical lasers (photodynamic therapy with a diode laser, a diode laser, neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet lasers, and erbium lasers). CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: With a moderate level of certainty, the panel found approximately a 0.5-millimeter average improvement in CAL with SRP. Combinations of SRP with assorted adjuncts resulted in a range of average CAL improvements between 0.2 and 0.6 mm over SRP alone. The panel judged the following 4 adjunctive therapies as beneficial with a moderate level of certainty: systemic subantimicrobial-dose doxycycline, systemic antimicrobials, chlorhexidine chips, and photodynamic therapy with a diode laser. There was a low level of certainty in the benefits of the other included adjunctive therapies. The panel provides clinical recommendations in the associated clinical practice guideline.

Evidence-based clinical practice guideline on the nonsurgical treatment of chronic periodontitis by means of scaling and root planing with or without adjuncts.

BACKGROUND: A panel of experts convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs presents an evidence-based clinical practice guideline on nonsurgical treatment of patients with chronic periodontitis by means of scaling and root planing (SRP) with or without adjuncts. METHODS: The authors developed this clinical practice guideline according to the American Dental Association's evidence-based guideline development methodology. This guideline is founded on a systematic review of the evidence that included 72 research articles providing clinical attachment level data on trials of at least 6 months' duration and published in English through July 2014. The strength of each recommendation (strong, in favor, weak, expert opinion for, expert opinion against, and against) is based on an assessment of the level of certainty in the evidence for the treatment's benefit in combination with an assessment of the balance between the magnitude of the benefit and the potential for adverse effects. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: For patients with chronic periodontitis, SRP showed a moderate benefit, and the benefits were judged to outweigh potential adverse effects. The authors voted in favor of SRP as the initial nonsurgical treatment for chronic periodontitis. Although systemic subantimicrobial-dose doxycycline and systemic antimicrobials showed similar magnitudes of benefits as adjunctive therapies to SRP, they were recommended at different strengths (in favor for systemic subantimicrobial-dose doxycycline and weak for systemic antimicrobials) because of the higher potential for adverse effects with higher doses of antimicrobials. The strengths of 2 other recommendations are weak: chlorhexidine chips and photodynamic therapy with a diode laser. Recommendations for the other local antimicrobials (doxycycline hyclate gel and minocycline microspheres) were expert opinion for. Recommendations for the nonsurgical use of other lasers as SRP adjuncts were limited to expert opinion against because there was uncertainty regarding their clinical benefits and benefit-to-adverse effects balance. Note that expert opinion for does not imply endorsement but instead signifies that evidence is lacking and the level of certainty in the evidence is low.

Topical trends in tobacco and alcohol articles published in three dental journals, 1980-2010.

The aim of this study was to conduct a review of articles about tobacco or alcohol published from 1980 to 2010 in the Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA), Journal of Dental Education (JDE), and Journal of Public Health Dentistry (JPHD) in an attempt to identify trends by decade in topics relevant to oral health consequences, oral cancer linkages, and cessation counseling. NVivo qualitative analysis software was used to code abstracts using the keywords "tobacco" or "alcohol." The search identified 269 articles: tobacco=211 (78%), alcohol=58 (22%). This number represented 2.4% of the total articles published in these journals for the specified years. While the percentage of tobacco-related articles increased over this period (with highs in the 1990s of 4.1% in the JDE and 9% in the JPHD), the percentage of alcohol articles reached only 1% for JADA and 3.3% for the JPHD in the 2000s. The number of tobacco-related articles addressing oral health effects, oral cancer linkages, and cessation counseling increased in the 1990s. Although there were modest increases in the number of articles about alcohol-related oral health effects and oral cancer linkages (particularly in the JPHD in the 2000s), only two articles (in JADA in the 2000s) addressed alcohol cessation counseling. This study concluded that tobacco and alcohol have received limited, though increasing, attention in these three major journals between 1980 and 2010, with alcohol receiving less attention than tobacco. These results suggest a need for more published studies on tobacco and alcohol interventions in dental and allied dental education to prepare students to contribute to this aspect of their patients' health.