Reliability assessment of the 2018 classification case definitions of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and accuracy in the assignment of the case definitions of peri-implant health and diseases according to the 2018 Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions. METHODS: Ten undergraduate students, 10 general dentists, and 10 experts in implant dentistry participated in this study. All examiners were provided with clinical and radiographic documentation of 25 dental implants. Eleven out the 25 cases were also accompanied by baseline readings. Examiners were asked to define all cases using the 2018 classification case definitions. Reliability among examiners was evaluated using the Fleiss kappa statistic. Accuracy was estimated using percentage of complete agreement and quadratic weighted kappa for pairwise comparisons between each rater and a gold standard diagnosis. RESULTS: The Fleiss kappa was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.51) and the mean quadratic weighted kappa value was 0.544. Complete agreement with the gold standard diagnosis was achieved in 59.8% of the cases. Expertise in implantology affected accuracy positively (p < 0.001) while the absence of baseline readings affected it negatively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both reliability and accuracy in assigning case definitions to dental implants according to the 2018 classification were mostly moderate. Some difficulties arose in the presence of specific challenging scenarios.

Implementation of a software application in staging and grading of periodontitis cases.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy and the inter-rater agreement among general dentists when staging and grading periodontitis cases with the aid of a software application (SA) developed by the Italian Society of Periodontology and Implantology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten general dentists were asked to independently assess 25 periodontitis cases using the SA. Accuracy was estimated using quadratic weighted kappa and examiners' percentage of agreement with a reference diagnosis provided by a gold standard examiner. Inter-rater agreement was evaluated using Fleiss kappa statistics. RESULTS: The overall case definition agreed with the reference diagnosis in 53.6% of cases. The agreements for each general dentist's pairwise comparisons against the reference definition were at least substantial in 100% of cases for stage, in 70% of cases for grade and in none of the cases for extent. Fleiss kappa was 0.818, 0.608, and 0.632 for stage, extent, and grade, respectively. The study recognized possible reasons that could lead to decreased accuracy using the SA. CONCLUSIONS: Supported by the SA, general dentists have reached substantial inter-rater agreement and highly accurate assignments of stage and grade. However, complete case definitions were correctly diagnosed in slightly over half of the cases.

The staging and grading system in defining periodontitis cases: consistency and accuracy amongst periodontal experts, general dentists and undergraduate students.

AIM: The objective of this study was to evaluate consistency and accuracy of the periodontitis staging and grading classification system. METHODS: Thirty participants (10 periodontal experts, 10 general dentists and 10 undergraduate students) and a gold-standard examiner were asked to classify 25 fully documented periodontitis cases twice. Fleiss kappa was used to estimate consistency across examiners. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to calculate consistency across time. Quadratic weighted kappa and percentage of complete agreement versus gold standard were computed to assess accuracy. RESULTS: Fleiss kappa for stage, extent and grade were 0.48, 0.37 and 0.45 respectively. The highest ICC was provided by students for stage (0.91), whereas the lowest ICC by general dentists for extent (0.79). Pairwise comparisons against gold standard showed mean value of kappa >0.81 for stage and >0.41 for grade and extent. Agreement with the gold standard for all three components of the case definition was achieved in 47.2% of cases. The study identified specific factors associated with lower consistency and accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis was highly consistent across time and moderately between examiners. Accuracy was almost perfect for stage and moderate for grade and extent. Additional efforts are required to improve training of general dentists.