3-year longitudinal study of the periodontal status of an adult population with gingivitis

Impact of Fixed Orthodontic Appliance and Clear Aligners on the Periodontal Health: A Prospective Clinical Study

This study aimed to evaluate the periodontal health of orthodontic patients with supportive periodontal therapy in a 3 month follow-up. The sample comprised 20 patients (mean age 20.6 ± 8.1 years) in treatment with multibracket fixed appliances (fixed group-FG) and 20 patients (mean age 34.7 ± 12.5 years) in treatment with clear aligners (clear aligners group-CAG). At baseline (T0) and after 3 months (T1), probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), and gingival recession (REC) were measured. Patients were trained to perform an individualized tooth brushing technique, and every 2 weeks they were re-called to reinforce the oral hygiene instructions. The intra-group comparisons (T1 vs. T0) were calculated with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, while a linear regression model was used for the inter-group comparisons (FG vs. CAG). The significance level was set at p < 0.05. Statistically significant decrease in both groups was found for PD (FG: Δ, -9.2 inter-quartile range (IQR), -22.5, -5.5; CAG: Δ, -12.6 IQR, -25.4, -4.8), BOP (FG: Δ, -53.5 IQR, -70.5, -37; CAG: Δ, -37.5 IQR, -54.5, -23), and PI (FG: Δ, -17.5 IQR, -62.5, 14.5; CAG: Δ, -24 IQR, -49.5, -5). The result of the linear regression models suggested that the type of appliance did not have any effects on the improvement of periodontal variables. Therefore, patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and clear aligners did not show differences in gingival health when followed by a dental hygienist.

A clinico-microbiologic study comparing the efficacy of locally delivered chlorhexidine chip and diode LASER as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal therapy

BACKGROUND

Considering the microbial etiology of the periodontal disease, the periodontal therapy aims to control or abolish the pathogenic microbes. The gold standard scaling and root planing procedure has been used since time immemorial but the drawbacks associated with it have led to the development of various adjunctive means. The current study was therefore, performed to comparatively assess the efficacy of local delivery of chlorhexidine and 808-nm diode LASER as an appurtenance to scaling and root planing in patients with chronic periodontitis.

METHODS

In a randomized split mouth evaluation, 30 patients having probing depth of ≥5 mm which bled on probing at least at 3 different sites were included. At baseline, the evaluation of plaque index, bleeding index, probing pocket depth and clinical attachment level was done and the microbial samples were collected for the assessment of spirochetes, motile rods and coccoid cells. The 3 selected sites of each subject were allocated to 3 different groups A, B, C viz; Scaling and root planing (SRP) + chlorhexidine chip, SRP + diode LASER and SRP respectively. The patients were recalled after 4 weeks to re-evaluate the clinical and microbiological parameters.

RESULTS

All the parameters significantly reduced from baseline to 4 weeks in all the 3 groups. Intergroup comparisons revealed remarkable difference between group A and C and group B and C, respectively; no notably significant difference was found between group A and B.

CONCLUSION

The additional use of LASER and chlorhexidine chip assures anti-inflammatory effect and anti-microbial effect that allows reduction in bacterial counts and promotes healing. The use of adjuncts have been found to be efficacious in controlling disease and promoting periodontal health and thereby reducing the need for surgical procedures to be undertaken.

Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults

BACKGROUND

Many dentists or hygienists provide scaling and polishing for patients at regular intervals, even for those at low risk of developing periodontal disease. There is debate over the clinical and cost effectiveness of 'routine scaling and polishing' and the optimal frequency at which it should be provided for healthy adults.A 'routine scale and polish' treatment is defined as scaling or polishing, or both, of the crown and root surfaces of teeth to remove local irritational factors (plaque, calculus, debris and staining), which does not involve periodontal surgery or any form of adjunctive periodontal therapy such as the use of chemotherapeutic agents or root planing. Routine scale and polish treatments are typically provided in general dental practice settings. The technique may also be referred to as prophylaxis, professional mechanical plaque removal or periodontal instrumentation.This review updates a version published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

1. To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health.2. To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing at different recall intervals for periodontal health.3. To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health when the treatment is provided by dentists compared with dental care professionals (dental therapists or dental hygienists).

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 10 January 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 12), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 10 January 2018), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 10 January 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of routine scale and polish treatments, with or without oral hygiene instruction, in healthy dentate adults without severe periodontitis. We excluded split-mouth trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the results of the searches against inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We calculated mean differences (MDs) (or standardised mean differences (SMDs) when different scales were reported) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs for dichotomous data. We used a fixed-effect model for meta-analyses. We contacted study authors when necessary to obtain missing information. We rated the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies with 1711 participants in the analyses. Both studies were conducted in UK general dental practices and involved adults without severe periodontitis who were regular attenders at dental appointments. One study measured outcomes at 24 months and the other at 36 months. Neither study measured adverse effects, changes in attachment level, tooth loss or halitosis.Comparison 1: routine scaling and polishing versus no scheduled scaling and polishingTwo studies compared planned, regular interval (six- and 12-monthly) scale and polish treatments versus no scheduled treatment. We found little or no difference between groups over a two- to three-year period for gingivitis, probing depths, oral health-related quality of life (all high-certainty evidence) and plaque (low-certainty evidence). The SMD for gingivitis when comparing six-monthly scale and polish treatment versus no scheduled treatment was -0.01 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.11; two trials, 1087 participants), and for 12-monthly scale and polish versus no scheduled treatment was -0.04 (95% CI -0.16 to 0.08; two trials, 1091 participants).Regular planned scale and polish treatments produced a small reduction in calculus levels over two to three years when compared with no scheduled scale and polish treatments (high-certainty evidence). The SMD for six-monthly scale and polish versus no scheduled treatment was -0.32 (95% CI -0.44 to -0.20; two trials, 1088 participants) and for 12-monthly scale and polish versus no scheduled treatment was -0.19 (95% CI -0.31 to -0.07; two trials, 1088 participants). The clinical importance of these small reductions is unclear.Participants' self-reported levels of oral cleanliness were higher when receiving six- and 12-monthly scale and polish treatments compared to no scheduled treatment, but the certainty of the evidence is low.Comparison 2: routine scaling and polishing at different recall intervalsTwo studies compared routine six-monthly scale and polish treatments versus 12-monthly treatments. We found little or no difference between groups over two to three years for the outcomes of gingivitis, probing depths, oral health-related quality of life (all high-certainty evidence) and plaque (low-certainty evidence). The SMD for gingivitis was 0.03 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.15; two trials, 1090 participants; I² = 0%). Six- monthly scale and polish treatments produced a small reduction in calculus levels over a two- to three-year period when compared with 12-monthly treatments (SMD -0.13 (95% CI -0.25 to -0.01; 2 trials, 1086 participants; high-certainty evidence). The clinical importance of this small reduction is unclear.The comparative effects of six- and 12-monthly scale and polish treatments on patients' self-reported levels of oral cleanliness were uncertain (very low-certainty evidence).Comparison 3: routine scaling and polishing provided by dentists compared with dental care professionals (dental therapists or hygienists)No studies evaluated this comparison.The review findings in relation to costs were uncertain (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For adults without severe periodontitis who regularly access routine dental care, routine scale and polish treatment makes little or no difference to gingivitis, probing depths and oral health-related quality of life over two to three years follow-up when compared with no scheduled scale and polish treatments (high-certainty evidence). There may also be little or no difference in plaque levels over two years (low-certainty evidence). Routine scaling and polishing reduces calculus levels compared with no routine scaling and polishing, with six-monthly treatments reducing calculus more than 12-monthly treatments over two to three years follow-up (high-certainty evidence), although the clinical importance of these small reductions is uncertain. Available evidence on the costs of the treatments is uncertain. The studies did not assess adverse effects.

Chronic Periodontitis Case Definitions and Confounders in Periodontal Research: A Systematic Assessment

Case definitions and criteria of periodontal diseases are not yet consistent worldwide. This can affect the accuracy of any comparison made between two studies. This study determines which are the most common chronic periodontitis case definitions as well as confounding variables that have been reported worldwide in periodontal literature. A systematic assessment on periodontal disease classification and confounders was conducted using all publications in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar between 1965 and October 2017. Screening of eligible studies and data extraction were conducted in duplicate and independently by two reviewers. The search protocol produced 4,218 articles. Out of these, 492 potentially relevant articles were selected for review. Only 351 studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Combination of probing depth and clinical attachment loss was the most common chronic periodontitis case definitions used (121, studies, 34.5%). CPI/CPITN was the most common classification used. Age was the most common confounder studied in periodontal research (303 studies, 86.3%), followed by gender (268 studies, 76.4%) and race (138 studies, 39.3%). Albumin and creatinine were the least common variables studied (1 or 2 studies each). Different case definitions affect the prevalence and treatment consequences of periodontitis. We need to standardize periodontitis case definitions worldwide to avoid difficulties in case diagnosis and prognosis. Further studies need to be done to assess the association between periodontitis and several potential confounders.

Improving the Quality of Dentistry (IQuaD): a cluster factorial randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-benefit of oral hygiene advice and/or periodontal instrumentation with routine care for the prevention and management of periodontal disease in dentate adults attending dental primary care

BACKGROUND

Periodontal disease is preventable but remains the most common oral disease worldwide, with major health and economic implications. Stakeholders lack reliable evidence of the relative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different types of oral hygiene advice (OHA) and the optimal frequency of periodontal instrumentation (PI).

OBJECTIVES

To test clinical effectiveness and assess the economic value of the following strategies: personalised OHA versus routine OHA, 12-monthly PI (scale and polish) compared with 6-monthly PI, and no PI compared with 6-monthly PI.

DESIGN

Multicentre, pragmatic split-plot, randomised open trial with a cluster factorial design and blinded outcome evaluation with 3 years' follow-up and a within-trial cost-benefit analysis. NHS and participant costs were combined with benefits [willingness to pay (WTP)] estimated from a discrete choice experiment (DCE).

SETTING

UK dental practices.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult dentate NHS patients, regular attenders, with Basic Periodontal Examination (BPE) scores of 0, 1, 2 or 3.

INTERVENTION

Practices were randomised to provide routine or personalised OHA. Within each practice, participants were randomised to the following groups: no PI, 12-monthly PI or 6-monthly PI (current practice).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical - gingival inflammation/bleeding on probing at the gingival margin (3 years). Patient - oral hygiene self-efficacy (3 years). Economic - net benefits (mean WTP minus mean costs).

RESULTS

A total of 63 dental practices and 1877 participants were recruited. The mean number of teeth and percentage of bleeding sites was 24 and 33%, respectively. Two-thirds of participants had BPE scores of ≤ 2. Under intention-to-treat analysis, there was no evidence of a difference in gingival inflammation/bleeding between the 6-monthly PI group and the no-PI group [difference 0.87%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.6% to 3.3%; p = 0.481] or between the 6-monthly PI group and the 12-monthly PI group (difference 0.11%, 95% CI -2.3% to 2.5%; p = 0.929). There was also no evidence of a difference between personalised and routine OHA (difference -2.5%, 95% CI -8.3% to 3.3%; p = 0.393). There was no evidence of a difference in self-efficacy between the 6-monthly PI group and the no-PI group (difference -0.028, 95% CI -0.119 to 0.063; p = 0.543) and no evidence of a clinically important difference between the 6-monthly PI group and the 12-monthly PI group (difference -0.097, 95% CI -0.188 to -0.006; p = 0.037). Compared with standard care, no PI with personalised OHA had the greatest cost savings: NHS perspective -£15 (95% CI -£34 to £4) and participant perspective -£64 (95% CI -£112 to -£16). The DCE shows that the general population value these services greatly. Personalised OHA with 6-monthly PI had the greatest incremental net benefit [£48 (95% CI £22 to £74)]. Sensitivity analyses did not change conclusions.

LIMITATIONS

Being a pragmatic trial, we did not deny PIs to the no-PI group; there was clear separation in the mean number of PIs between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no additional benefit from scheduling 6-monthly or 12-monthly PIs over not providing this treatment unless desired or recommended, and no difference between OHA delivery for gingival inflammation/bleeding and patient-centred outcomes. However, participants valued, and were willing to pay for, both interventions, with greater financial value placed on PI than on OHA.

FUTURE WORK

Assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of providing multifaceted periodontal care packages in primary dental care for those with periodontitis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56465715.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Relationship between diabetes and periodontal infection

Periodontal disease is a high prevalent disease. In the United States 47.2% of adults ≥ 30 years old have been diagnosed with some type of periodontitis. Longitudinal studies have demonstrated a two-way relationship between diabetes and periodontitis, with more severe periodontal tissue destruction in diabetic patients and poorer glycemic control in diabetic subjects with periodontal disease. Periodontal treatment can be successful in diabetic patients. Short term effects of periodontal treatment are similar in diabetic patients and healthy population but, more recurrence of periodontal disease can be expected in no well controlled diabetic individuals. However, effects of periodontitis and its treatment on diabetes metabolic control are not clearly defined and results of the studies remain controversial.

Smoking decreases structural and functional resilience in the subgingival ecosystem

AIMS

Dysbiotic microbial communities underlie the aetiology of several oral diseases, especially in smokers. The ability of an ecosystem to rebound from the dysbiotic state and re-establish a health-compatible community, a characteristic known as resilience, plays an important role in susceptibility to future disease. The present investigation was undertaken to examine the effects of smoking on colonization dynamics and resilience in marginal and subgingival biofilms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Marginal and subgingival plaque and gingival crevicular fluid samples were collected from 25 current and 25 never smokers with pre-existing gingivitis at baseline, following resolution, after 1, 2 4, 7, 14 and 21 days of undisturbed plaque formation and following resolution. 16S cloning and sequencing was used for bacterial identification and multiplexed bead-based flow cytometry was used to quantify the levels of 27 immune mediators.

RESULTS

Smokers demonstrated an early pathogenic colonization that led to sustained pathogen enrichment with periodontal and respiratory pathogens, eliciting a florid immune response. Smokers also demonstrated greater abundance of pathogenic species, poor compositional correlation between marginal and subgingival ecosystems, and significantly greater pro-inflammatory responses following resolution of the second episode of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of the subgingival microbiome to "reset" itself following episodes of disease is decreased in smokers, thereby lowering the resilience of the ecosystem and decreasing its resistance to future disease.

Learned and unlearned concepts in periodontal diagnostics: a 50-year perspective

In the past 50 years, conceptual changes in the field of periodontal diagnostics have paralleled those associated with a better scientific understanding of the full spectrum of processes that affect periodontal health and disease. Fifty years ago, concepts regarding the diagnosis of periodontal diseases followed the classical pathology paradigm. It was believed that the two basic forms of destructive periodontal disease were chronic inflammatory periodontitis and 'periodontosis'- a degenerative condition. In the subsequent 25 years it was shown that periodontosis was an infection. By 1987, major new concepts regarding the diagnosis and pathogenesis of periodontitis included: (i) all cases of untreated gingivitis do not inevitably progress to periodontitis; (ii) progression of untreated periodontitis is often episodic; (iii) some sites with untreated periodontitis do not progress; (iv) a rather small population of specific bacteria ('periodontal pathogens') appear to be the main etiologic agents of chronic inflammatory periodontitis; and (v) tissue damage in periodontitis is primarily caused by inflammatory and immunologic host responses to infecting agents. The concepts that were in place by 1987 are still largely intact in 2012. However, in the decades to come, it is likely that new information on the human microbiome will change our current concepts concerning the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of periodontal diseases.

Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults

BACKGROUND

Many dentists or hygienists provide scaling and polishing for patients at regular intervals, even if those patients are considered to be at low risk of developing periodontal disease. There is debate over the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of 'routine scaling and polishing' and the 'optimal' frequency at which it should be provided for healthy adults.A 'routine scale and polish' treatment is defined as scaling or polishing or both of the crown and root surfaces of teeth to remove local irritational factors (plaque, calculus, debris and staining), that does not involve periodontal surgery or any form of adjunctive periodontal therapy such as the use of chemotherapeutic agents or root planing.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were: 1) to determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health; 2) to determine the beneficial and harmful effects of providing routine scaling and polishing at different time intervals on periodontal health; 3) to compare the effects of routine scaling and polishing with or without oral hygiene instruction (OHI) on periodontal health; and 4) to compare the effects of routine scaling and polishing provided by a dentist or dental care professional (dental therapist or dental hygienist) on periodontal health.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 15 July 2013), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 6), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 15 July 2013) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 15 July 2013). We searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Register (clinicaltrials.gov) for ongoing and completed studies to July 2013. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of routine scale and polish treatments (excluding split-mouth trials) with and without OHI in healthy dentate adults, without severe periodontitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the results of the searches against inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We calculated mean differences (MDs) (standardised mean differences (SMDs) when different scales were reported) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data and, where results were meta-analysed, we used a fixed-effect model as there were fewer than four studies. Study authors were contacted where possible and where deemed necessary for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies were included in this review with 836 participants included in the analyses. All three studies are assessed as at unclear risk of bias. The numerical results are only presented here for the primary outcome gingivitis. There were no useable data presented in the studies for the outcomes of attachment change and tooth loss. No studies reported any adverse effects.- Objective 1: Scale and polish versus no scale and polish Only one trial provided data for the comparison between scale and polish versus no scale and polish. This study was conducted in general practice and compared both six-monthly and 12-monthly scale and polish treatments with no treatment. This study showed no evidence to claim or refute benefit for scale and polish treatments for the outcomes of gingivitis, calculus and plaque. The MD for six-monthly scale and polish, for the percentage of index teeth with bleeding at 24 months was -2% (95% CI -10% to 6%; P value = 0.65), with 40% of the sites in the control group with bleeding. The MD for 12-monthly scale and polish was -1% (95% CI -9% to 7%; P value = 0.82). The body of evidence was assessed as of low quality.- Objective 2: Scale and polish at different time intervals Two studies, both at unclear risk of bias, compared routine scale and polish provided at different time intervals. When comparing six with 12 months there was insufficient evidence to determine a difference for gingivitis at 24 months SMD -0.08 (95% CI -0.27 to 0.10). There were some statistically significant differences in favour of scaling and polishing provided at more frequent intervals, in particular between three and 12 months for the outcome of gingivitis at 24 months, with OHI, MD -0.14 (95% CI -0.23 to -0.05; P value = 0.003) and without OHI MD -0.21 (95% CI -0.30 to -0.12; P value < 0.001) (mean per patient measured on 0-3 scale), based on one study. There was some evidence of a reduction in calculus. This body of evidence was assessed as of low quality.- Objective 3: Scale and polish with and without OHIOne study provided data for the comparison of scale and polish treatment with and without OHI. There was a reduction in gingivitis for the 12-month scale and polish treatment when assessed at 24 months MD -0.14 (95% CI -0.22 to -0.06) in favour of including OHI. There were also significant reductions in plaque for both three and 12-month scale and polish treatments when OHI was included. The body of evidence was once again assessed as of low quality.- Objective 4: Scale and polish provided by a dentist compared with a dental care professionalNo studies were found which compared the effects of routine scaling and polishing provided by a dentist or dental care professional (dental therapist or dental hygienist) on periodontal health.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to determine the effects of routine scale and polish treatments. High quality trials conducted in general dental practice settings with sufficiently long follow-up periods (five years or more) are required to address the objectives of this review.

Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients

BACKGROUND

The frequency with which patients should attend for a dental check-up and the potential effects on oral health of altering recall intervals between check-ups have been the subject of ongoing international debate for almost 3 decades. Although recommendations regarding optimal recall intervals vary between countries and dental healthcare systems, 6-monthly dental check-ups have traditionally been advocated by general dental practitioners in many developed countries.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of different fixed recall intervals (for example 6 months versus 12 months) for the following different types of dental check-up: a) clinical examination only; b) clinical examination plus scale and polish; c) clinical examination plus preventive advice; d) clinical examination plus preventive advice plus scale and polish. To determine the relative beneficial and harmful effects between any of these different types of dental check-up at the same fixed recall interval. To compare the beneficial and harmful effects of recall intervals based on clinicians' assessment of patients' disease risk with fixed recall intervals. To compare the beneficial and harmful effects of no recall interval/patient driven attendance (which may be symptomatic) with fixed recall intervals.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned and the authors of some papers were contacted to identify further trials and obtain additional information. Date of most recent searches: 5th March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design - random allocation of participants; participants - all children and adults receiving dental check-ups in primary care settings, irrespective of their level of risk for oral disease; interventions - recall intervals for the following different types of dental check-ups: a) clinical examination only; b) clinical examination plus scale and polish; c) clinical examination plus preventive advice; d) clinical examination plus scale and polish plus preventive advice; e) no recall interval/patient driven attendance (which may be symptomatic); f) clinician risk-based recall intervals; outcomes - clinical status outcomes for dental caries (including, but not limited to, mean dmft/DMFT, dmfs/DMFS scores, caries increment, filled teeth (including replacement restorations), early carious lesions arrested or reversed); periodontal disease (including, but not limited to, plaque, calculus, gingivitis, periodontitis, change in probing depth, attachment level); oral mucosa (presence or absence of mucosal lesions, potentially malignant lesions, cancerous lesions, size and stage of cancerous lesions at diagnosis). In addition the following outcomes were considered where reported: patient-centred outcomes, economic cost outcomes, other outcomes such as improvements in oral health knowledge and attitudes, harms, changes in dietary habits and any other oral health-related behavioural change.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted, where deemed necessary and where possible, for further details regarding study design and for data clarification. A quality assessment of the included trial was carried out. The Cochrane Collaboration's statistical guidelines were followed.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study (with 188 participants) was included in this review and was assessed as having a high risk of bias. This study provided limited data for dental caries outcomes (dmfs/DMFS increment) and economic cost outcomes (reported time taken to provide examinations and treatment).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to draw any conclusions regarding the potential beneficial and harmful effects of altering the recall interval between dental check-ups. There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the practice of encouraging patients to attend for dental check-ups at 6-monthly intervals. It is important that high quality RCTs are conducted for the outcomes listed in this review in order to address the objectives of this review.

Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults

BACKGROUND

Many dentists or hygienists provide scaling and polishing for patients at regular intervals, even if those patients are considered to be at low risk of developing periodontal disease. There is debate over the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of 'routine scaling and polishing' and the 'optimal' frequency at which it should be provided.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives were: to determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health; to determine the beneficial and harmful effects of providing routine scaling and polishing at different time intervals on periodontal health; to compare the effects of routine scaling and polishing provided by a dentist or professionals complementary to dentistry (PCD) (dental therapists or dental hygienists) on periodontal health.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned and the authors of eligible studies were contacted where possible to identify trials and obtain additional information. Date of most recent searches: 5th March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design - random allocation of participants; participants - anyone with an erupted permanent dentition who were judged to have received a 'routine scale and polish' (as defined in this review); interventions - 'routine scale and polish' (as defined in this review) and routine scale and polish provided at different time intervals; outcomes - tooth loss, plaque, calculus, gingivitis, bleeding and periodontal indices, changes in probing depth, attachment change, patient-centred outcomes and economic outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted where possible and where deemed necessary for further details regarding study design and for data clarification. A quality assessment of all included trials was carried out. The Cochrane Collaboration's statistical guidelines were followed and both standardised mean differences and mean differences were calculated as appropriate using random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies were included in this review. All studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias.Two split-mouth studies provided data for the comparison between scale and polish versus no scale and polish. One study, involving patients attending a recall programme following periodontal treatment, found no statistically significant differences for plaque, gingivitis and attachment loss between experimental and control units at each time point during the 1 year trial. The other study, involving adolescents in a developing country with high existing levels of calculus who had not received any dental treatment for at least 5 years, reported statistically significant differences in calculus and gingivitis (bleeding) scores between treatment and control units at 6, 12 and 22 months (in favour of 'scale and polish units') following a single scale and polish provided at baseline to treatment units. For comparisons between routine scale and polish provided at different time intervals, there were some statistically significant differences in favour of scaling and polishing provided at more frequent intervals: 2 weeks versus 6 months, 2 weeks versus 12 months (for the outcomes plaque, gingivitis, pocket depth and attachment change); 3 months versus 12 months (for the outcomes plaque, calculus and gingivitis). There were no studies comparing the effects of scaling and polishing provided by dentists or professionals complementary to dentistry.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The research evidence is of insufficient quality to reach any conclusions regarding the beneficial and adverse effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health and regarding the effects of providing this intervention at different time intervals. High quality clinical trials are required to address the basic questions posed in this review.

Case definitions for use in population-based surveillance of periodontitis

Many definitions of periodontitis have been used in the literature for population-based studies, but there is no accepted standard. In early epidemiologic studies, the two major periodontal diseases, gingivitis and periodontitis, were combined and considered to be a continuum. National United States surveys were conducted in 1960 to 1962, 1971 to 1974, 1981, 1985 to 1986, 1988 to 1994, and 1999 to 2000. The case definitions and protocols used in the six national surveys reflect a continuing evolution and improvement over time. Generally, the clinical diagnosis of periodontitis is based on measures of probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), the radiographic pattern and extent of alveolar bone loss, gingival inflammation measured as bleeding on probing, or a combination of these measures. Several other patient characteristics are considered, and several factors, such as age, can affect measurements of PD and CAL. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements of PD and CAL are important because case definitions for periodontitis are based largely on either or both measurements, and relatively small changes in these values can result in large changes in disease prevalence. The classification currently accepted by the American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) was devised by the 1999 International Workshop for a Classification of Periodontal Diseases and Conditions. However, in 2003 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the AAP appointed a working group to develop further standardized clinical case definitions for population-based studies of periodontitis. This classification defines severe periodontitis and moderate periodontitis in terms of PD and CAL to enhance case definitions and further demonstrates the importance of thresholds of PD and CAL and the number of affected sites when determining prevalence.

Comparison of the effects of cetylpyridinium chloride with an essential oil mouth rinse on dental plaque and gingivitis ? a six-month randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of an experimental mouth rinse containing 0.07% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) (Crest Pro-Health) with those provided by a commercially available mouth rinse containing essential oils (EOs) (Listerine) on dental plaque accumulation and prevention of gingivitis in an unsupervised 6-month randomized clinical trial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This double-blind, 6-month, parallel group, positively controlled study involved 151 subjects balanced and randomly assigned to either positive control (EO) or experimental (CPC) mouth rinse treatment groups. At baseline, subjects received a dental prophylaxis procedure and began unsupervised rinsing twice a day with 20 ml of their assigned mouthwash for 30 s after brushing their teeth for 1 min. Subjects were assessed for gingivitis and gingival bleeding by the Gingival index (GI) of Löe & Silness (1963) and plaque by the Silness & Löe (1964) Plaque index at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of rinsing. At 3 and 6 months, oral soft tissue health was assessed. Microbiological samples were also taken for community profiling by the DNA checkerboard method.

RESULTS

Results show that after 3 and 6 months of rinsing, there were no significant differences (p=0.05) between the experimental (CPC) and the positive control mouth rinse treatment groups for overall gingivitis status, gingival bleeding, and plaque accumulation. At 6 months, the covariant (baseline) adjusted mean GI and bleeding sites percentages for the CPC and the EO rinses were 0.52 and 0.53 and 8.7 and 9.3, respectively. Both mouth rinses were well tolerated by the subjects. Microbiological community profiles were similar for the two treatment groups. Statistically, a significant greater reduction in bleeding sites was observed for the CPC rinse versus the EO rinse.

CONCLUSION

The essential findings of this study indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in the anti-plaque and anti-gingivitis benefits between the experimental CPC mouth rinse and the positive control EO mouth rinse over a 6-month period.

Study design for calibration of clinical examiners measuring periodontal parameters

BACKGROUND

We present an approach to examiner calibration study design where the number of calibration subjects is based on a specified margin of error (half-width of the 95% confidence interval [CI]) of the percentage of agreement (exact and within 1 mm) for both intra- and interexaminer reliability assessments.

METHODS

An experienced standard examiner (S) trained three dental hygienists (A, B, and C) in correct procedures for obtaining a variety of periodontal measures. Duplicate measurements of probing depth (PD [mm]) and the free gingival margin to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ-GM [mm]) were obtained in a pilot study to design a formal examiner calibration study, where sample sizes were adjusted for the effects of within-subject clustering of binary indices of agreement.

RESULTS

Within-subject clustering of agreement indices resulted in an approximate four-fold increase in the variance of the estimates of percentage of agreement with the standard. PD and CEJ-GM percentage of exact agreement measurements (95% CI) for each examiner-standard pair, respectively, were as follows: AS=55% (48%, 61%) and 70% (62%, 78%); BS=52% (45%, 59%) and 73% (63%, 82%); and CS=55% (50%, 61%) and 72% (65%, 79%). The corresponding 95% CIs unadjusted for the effects of clustering underestimated the margin of error associated with the estimates of exact agreement by as much as 57% for PD and 68% for CEJ-GM.

CONCLUSION

Failure to account for dependence among site-level agreement indices results in a false sense of precision in the resulting reliability estimates and can lead to faulty inference.

The Effect of Patient-Centered Plaque Control and Periodontal Maintenance Therapy on Adverse Outcomes of Periodontitis

The purpose of this study was to evaluate systematic reviews that addressed the effectiveness of periodontal maintenance therapy for the management of patients with periodontitis. Recent surveys of dental care patterns suggest a marked increase in preventive and maintenance periodontal care in populations that retain the dentition for an increasingly longer lifetime. A considerable body of clinical investigation concludes that a multitherapy periodontal maintenance approach is effective in improving periodontal outcomes in patients treated for periodontitis. Individual components of such maintenance therapy were assessed, including the effects of an oral examination, personal oral hygiene instructions, supragingival scaling and polishing, subgingival scaling and root planing, adjunctive procedures, and maintenance frequency. There is much controversy about improvement in oral health that may accrue from the placebo effect of an examination and the maintenance ritual. Improved plaque control by the patient in anticipation of a forthcoming examination alone might be reflected in decreased measurements for plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation but the role of placebo effects on periodontitis remains unclear. There are insufficient randomized controlled trials to reach conclusions regarding the individual beneficial effects of repeated oral hygiene instructions or routine scaling/polishing on the recurrence of periodontitis. While subgingival root planing seems an effective component of periodontal maintenance, neither clinical investigations nor randomly controlled trial evidence have established an ideal maintenance frequency based on individual patient risk for periodontitis. The adjunctive beneficial effects of both locally and systemically administered antimicrobial agents were statistically significant for some formulations, and may be particularly useful clinically in patients who are resistant to mechanical therapy. We conclude that few clinical or randomized controlled studies have evaluated the individual benefit or required frequency of the periodontal maintenance ritual for patients who are relatively resistant or susceptible to periodontitis.

A systematic review of professional mechanical plaque removal for prevention of periodontal diseases

AIM

To investigate the effect of professional mechanical plaque removal (PMPR) on the prevention of periodontal diseases.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and cohort studies from 1950 to October 2004. Screening and data abstraction were conducted independently and in duplicate. Critical appraisal of studies was based on objective criteria and evidence tables were constructed.

RESULTS

From 2179 titles and abstracts, 132 full-text articles were screened and 32 studies were relevant. Evidence exists that PMPR in adults, particularly in combination with oral hygiene instruction (OHI), may be more effective than no treatment judged by surrogate measures. The evidence for a benefit of PMPR+OHI over OHI alone is less clear. The optimum frequency of PMPR has not been investigated although more frequent PMPR is associated with improved markers of health. The strength of evidence for these results ranges from weak to moderate due to risk of bias, inconsistent results, lack of appropriate statistics and small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

There appears to be little value in providing PMPR without OHI. In fact, repeated OHI might have a similar effect as PMPR. Some forms of PMPR might achieve greater patient satisfaction. There is little difference in beneficial or adverse effects of different methods of PMPR.

Etiology and pathogenesis of periodontal diseases

The two most prevalent and most investigated periodontal diseases are dental plaque-induced gingivitis and chronic periodontitis. The last 10 to 15 years have seen the emergence of several important new findings and concepts regarding the etiopathogenesis of periodontal diseases. These findings include the recognition of dental bacterial plaque as a biofilm, identification and characterization of genetic defects that predispose individuals to periodontitis, host-defense mechanisms implicated in periodontal tissue destruction, and the interaction of risk factors with host defenses and bacterial plaque. This article reviews current aspects of the etiology and pathogenesis of periodontal diseases.

Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients

BACKGROUND

The frequency with which patients should attend for a dental check-up and the potential effects on oral health of altering recall intervals between check-ups have been the subject of ongoing international debate for almost 3 decades. Although recommendations regarding optimal recall intervals vary between countries and dental healthcare systems, 6-monthly dental check-ups have traditionally been advocated by general dental practitioners in many developed countries.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of different fixed recall intervals (for example 6 months versus 12 months) for the following different types of dental check-up: a) clinical examination only; b) clinical examination plus scale and polish; c) clinical examination plus preventive advice; d) clinical examination plus preventive advice plus scale and polish. To determine the relative beneficial and harmful effects between any of these different types of dental check-up at the same fixed recall interval. To compare the beneficial and harmful effects of recall intervals based on clinicians' assessment of patients' disease risk with fixed recall intervals. To compare the beneficial and harmful effects of no recall interval/patient driven attendance (which may be symptomatic) with fixed recall intervals.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned and the authors of some papers were contacted to identify further trials and obtain additional information. Date of most recent searches: 9th April 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design- random allocation of participants; participants - all children and adults receiving dental check-ups in primary care settings, irrespective of their level of risk for oral disease; interventions -recall intervals for the following different types of dental check-ups: a) clinical examination only; b) clinical examination plus scale and polish; c) clinical examination plus preventive advice; d) clinical examination plus scale and polish plus preventive advice; e) no recall interval/patient driven attendance (which may be symptomatic); f) clinician risk-based recall intervals; outcomes - clinical status outcomes for dental caries (including, but not limited to, mean dmft/DMFT, dmfs/DMFS scores, caries increment, filled teeth (including replacement restorations), early carious lesions arrested or reversed); periodontal disease (including, but not limited to, plaque, calculus, gingivitis, periodontitis, change in probing depth, attachment level); oral mucosa (presence or absence of mucosal lesions, potentially malignant lesions, cancerous lesions, size and stage of cancerous lesions at diagnosis). In addition the following outcomes were considered where reported: patient-centred outcomes, economic cost outcomes, other outcomes such as improvements in oral health knowledge and attitudes, harms, changes in dietary habits and any other oral health-related behavioural change.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two authors. Authors were contacted, where deemed necessary and where possible, for further details regarding study design and for data clarification. A quality assessment of the included trial was carried out. The Cochrane Oral Health Group's statistical guidelines were followed.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study (with 188 participants) was included in this review and was assessed as having a high risk of bias. This study provided limited data for dental caries outcomes (dmfs/DMFS increment) and economic cost outcomes (reported time taken to provide examinations and treatment).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to draw any conclusions regarding the potential beneficial and harmful effects of altering the recall interval between dental check-ups. There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the practice of encouraging patients to attend for dental check-ups at 6-monthly intervals. It is important that high quality RCTs are conducted for the outcomes listed in this review in order to address the objectives of this review.

Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults

BACKGROUND

Many dentists or hygienists provide scaling and polishing for patients at regular intervals, even if those patients are considered to be at low risk of developing periodontal disease. There is debate over the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of 'routine scaling and polishing' and the 'optimal' frequency at which it should be provided.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives were: to determine the beneficial and harmful effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health; to determine the beneficial and harmful effects of providing routine scaling and polishing at different time intervals on periodontal health; to compare the effects of routine scaling and polishing provided by a dentist or professionals complementary to dentistry (PCD) (dental therapist or dental hygienist) on periodontal health.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned and the authors of eligible studies were contacted where possible to identify trials and obtain additional information. Date of most recent searches: 9th April 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design - random allocation of participants; participants - anyone with an erupted permanent dentition who were judged to have received a 'routine scale and polish' (as defined in this review); interventions - 'routine scale and polish' (as defined in this review) and routine scale and polish provided at different time intervals ; outcomes- tooth loss, plaque, calculus, gingivitis, bleeding and periodontal indices, changes in probing depth, attachment change, patient-centred outcomes and economic outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two reviewers. Authors were contacted where possible and where deemed necessary for further details regarding study design and for data clarification. A quality assessment of all included trials was carried out. The Cochrane Collaboration's statistical guidelines were followed and both standardised mean differences and weighted mean differences were calculated as appropriate using random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies were included in this review and all studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias. Two split-mouth studies provided data for the comparison between scale and polish versus no scale and polish. One study, involving patients attending a recall programme following periodontal treatment, found no statistically significant differences for plaque, gingivitis and attachment loss between experimental and control units at each time point during the 1 year trial. The other study, involving adolescents in a developing country with high existing levels of calculus who had not received any dental treatment for at least 5 years, reported statistically significant differences in calculus and gingivitis (bleeding) scores between treatment and control units at 6, 12 and 22 months (in favour of 'scale and polish units') following a single scale and polish provided at baseline to treatment units. For comparisons between routine scale and polish provided at different time intervals, there were some statistically significant differences in favour of scaling and polishing provided at more frequent intervals: 2 weeks versus 6 months, 2 weeks versus 12 months (for the outcomes plaque, gingivitis, pocket depth and attachment change); 3 months versus 12 months (for the outcomes plaque, calculus and gingivitis). There were no studies comparing the effects of scaling and polishing provided by dentists or Professionals Complementary to Dentistry.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The research evidence is of insufficient quality to reach any conclusions regarding the beneficial and adverse effects of routine scaling and polishing for periodontal health and regarding the effects of providing this intervention at different time intervals. High quality clinical trials are required to address the basic questions posed in this review.

Modulation of clinical expression of plaque-induced gingivitis. I. Background review and rationale

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article is to provide the necessary background and rationale for the accompanying studies, which are ultimately aimed at identifying genetic and environmental factors determining gingivitis susceptibility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The literature on factors reported to modify the clinical expression of gingivitis, i.e., factors that determine individual variability in gingival inflammatory response to plaque, is presented.

RESULTS

Clinical evidence suggests that the gingival inflammatory response to plaque accumulation may differ substantially among individuals. However, most of the available studies are of small scale and not purposely designed to address the issue. Systemic factors implicated in modulation of the clinical expression of gingivitis include metabolic, genetic, environmental and other factors. The significance of such factors in designing and conducting a large-scale experimental gingivitis trial and means to account for them are discussed.

CONCLUSION

Although several factors have been implicated, genetic or environmental factors underlying differences in gingivitis expression are not fully elucidated. The accompanying studies aim to identify and characterize, among participants in a specifically designed large-scale experimental gingivitis trial, subjects that differ significantly in their gingival inflammatory response to plaque. This is the first step in an effort to determine genetic or environmental factors underlying such differences.

Nonsurgical periodontal therapy

Regular home care by the patient in addition to professional removal of subgingival plaque is generally very effective in controlling most inflammatory periodontal diseases. When disease does recur, despite frequent recall, it can usually be attributed to lack of sufficient supragingival and subgingival plaque control or to other risk factors that influence host response, such as diabetes or smoking. Causative factors contributing to recurrent disease include deep inaccessible pockets, overhangs, poor crown margins and plaque-retentive calculus. In most cases, simply performing a thorough periodontal debridement under local anesthesia will stop disease progression and result in improvement in the clinical signs and symptoms of active disease. If however, clinical signs of disease activity persist following thorough mechanical therapy, such as increased pocket depths, loss of attachment and bleeding on probing, other pharmacotherapeutic therapies should be considered. Augmenting scaling and root planing or maintenance visits with adjunctive chemotherapeutic agents for controlling plaque and gingivitis could be as simple as placing the patient on an antimicrobial mouthrinse and/or toothpaste with agents such as fluorides, chlorhexidine or triclosan, to name a few. Since supragingival plaque reappears within hours or days after its removal, it is important that patients have access to effective alternative chemotherapeutic products that could help them achieve adequate supragingival plaque control. Recent studies, for example, have documented the positive effect of triclosan toothpaste on the long-term maintenance of both gingivitis and periodontitis patients. Daily irrigation with a powered irrigation device, with or without an antimicrobial agent, is also useful for decreasing the inflammation associated with gingivitis and periodontitis. Clinically significant changes in probing depths and attachment levels are not usually expected with irrigation alone. Recent reports, however, would indicate that, when daily irrigation with water was added to a regular oral hygiene home regimen, a significant reduction in probing depth, bleeding on probing and Gingival Index was observed. A significant reduction in cytokine levels (interleukin-1beta and prostaglandin E2, which are associated with destructive changes in inflamed tissues and bone resorption also occurs. If patient-applied antimicrobial therapy is insufficient in preventing, arresting, or reversing the disease progression, then professionally applied antimicrobial agents should be considered including sustained local drug delivery products. Other, more broadly based pharmacotherapeutic agents may be indicated for multiple failing sites. Such agents would include systemic antibiotics or host modulating drugs used in conjunction with periodontal debridement. More aggressive types of juvenile periodontitis or severe rapidly advancing adult periodontitis usually require a combination of surgical intervention in conjunction with systemic antibiotics and generally are not controlled with nonsurgical anti-infective therapy alone. It should be noted, however, that, to date, no home care products or devices currently available can completely control or eliminate the pathogenic plaques associated with periodontal diseases for extended periods of time. Daily home care and frequent recall are still paramount for long-term success. Nonsurgical therapy remains the cornerstone of periodontal treatment. Attention to detail, patient compliance and proper selection of adjunctive antimicrobial agents for sustained plaque control are important elements in achieving successful long-term results. Frequent re-evaluation and careful monitoring allows the practitioner the opportunity to intervene early in the disease state, to reverse or arrest the progression of periodontal disease with meticulous nonsurgical anti-infective therapy.

Treatment of plaque-induced gingivitis, chronic periodontitis, and other clinical conditions

The inflammatory components of plaque induced gingivitis and chronic periodontitis can be managed effectively for the majority of patients with a plaque control program and non-surgical and/or surgical root debridement coupled with continued periodontal maintenance procedures. Some patients may need additional therapeutic procedures. All of the therapeutic modalities reviewed in this position paper may be utilized by the clinician at various times over the long-term management of the patient's periodontal condition.

Periodontal disease among indigenous people in the Amazon rain forest

BACKGROUND

People are not all equally susceptible to periodontitis. To understand the epidemiology and natural history of this disease, it is important to study populations with varying genetic backgrounds and environmental exposures.

AIM

Characterize the periodontal condition of a sample of indigenous adults in a remote region of the Amazon rain forest and determine the association of periodontal disease with various demographic, behavioral and environmental factors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional evaluation of 244 subjects aged 20-70 years was conducted. Pocket depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque and calculus were assessed for the Ramfjord index teeth.

RESULTS

These people had high levels of plaque, calculus and BOP. The mean PD was rather shallow (2.45 mm in 20-29 year-olds to 2.73 mm in 50+ year-olds) and did not increase significantly with age. Mean CAL (0.57 mm in 20-29 year-olds and 2.26 mm in 50+ year-olds) and mean location of the free gingival margin in relation to the cemento-enamel junction changed significantly with age (p<0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that increasing age, bleeding on probing and calculus scores were positively associated with mean CAL (p<0.01). Sex, ethnicity, level of modern acculturation, use of coca or tobacco paste, frequency of dental visits and plaque were not associated with mean CAL.

CONCLUSIONS

Periodontal disease in these people was mainly associated with gingival recession rather than deep pockets. Most people had clinical attachment loss but despite poor oral hygiene and extensive gingival inflammation, they did not have very severe periodontal destruction.

Oral hygiene and gingivitis in a Swedish adult population 1973, 1983 and 1993

The periodontal condition of the inhabitants of Jönköping County, Sweden was followed for 20 years by means of 3 cross-sectional investigations performed in 1973, 1983, and 1993. The study comprised individuals in the age groups 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70 years. The number of dentate individuals was 537 in 1973, 550 in 1983, and 552 in 1993. All individuals participating in the studies were examined clinically and radiographically. They also filled out a questionnaire about dental care habits, socio-economic status, and general health. A clear reduction in the plaque score was seen between 1973 and 1983 in all age groups. With one exception, no further significant change in plaque levels was found between 1983 and 1993: the increase in plaque among the 20-year-olds was significant. In 1993 the mean % of surfaces with plaque was between 30% and 40% in all age groups. Gingivitis values corresponded well with the values of dental plaque; the same pattern with a clear reduction in gingivitis score was seen in all age groups between 1973 and 1983, and an increase in the mean frequency of gingival inflammation between 1983 and 1993 was seen in the 20-year age group. 30% of the individuals in this age group had more than 50% gingivitis in 1993 compared with 9% of the individuals in 1983. The 20-year-olds were further analyzed in a linear regression model using gingivitis as a dependent variable against some socio-economic, general health, and dental care variables associated with poor oral hygiene and gingivitis. In 1993, the most important explanatory variable was gender: significantly more males than females had higher gingivitis scores. The second most important explanatory variable was toothbrushing habits. Together they explained 10.9% of the variance. The multivariate analysis did not reveal approximal cleaning habits to be significant, probably due to their strong connection to gender and toothbrushing habits. In the 1983 sample, no significant explanatory variables were found. It was concluded from this data that it is important not only to renew but also to direct preventive guidelines more towards young adults who have no previous extensive experience of oral disease so that they will not be excluded from dental care and their dental health thereby jeopardised. In addition to preventive programmes aimed at the population as a whole, individual programmes based on risk targeting are also necessary to reduce the number of people developing dental disease and to increase the quality of dental care.

Microbiota of health, gingivitis, and initial periodontitis

This study compared the subgingival microbiota in periodontal health, gingivitis and initial periodontitis using predominant culture and a DNA probe, checkerboard hybridization method. 56 healthy adult subjects with minimal periodontal attachment loss were clinically monitored at 3-month intervals for 12 months. More sites demonstrated small increments of attachment loss than attachment gain over the monitoring period. Sites, from 17 subjects, showing > or = 1.5 mm periodontal attachment loss during monitoring were sampled as active lesions for microbial analysis. Twelve subjects demonstrated interproximal lesions, and 5 subjects had attachment loss at buccal sites (recession). Cultural studies identified Bacteroides forsythus, Campylobacter rectus, and Selenomonas noxia as the predominant species associated with active interproximal lesions (9 subjects), whereas Actinomyces naeslundii, and Streptococcus oralis, were the dominant species colonizing buccal active sites. A. naeslundii, Campylobacter gracilis, and B. forsythus (at lower levels than active sites) were the dominant species cultured from gingivitis (10 subjects). Health-associated species (10 subjects) included Streptococcus oralis, A. naeslundii, and Actinomyces gerencseriae. DNA probe data identified higher mean levels of B. forsythus and C. rectus with active (7 subjects) compared to inactive periodontitis sites. Porphyromonas gingivalis and Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans were detected infrequently. Cluster analysis of the cultural microbiota grouped 8/9 active interproximal lesions in one subcluster characterized by a mostly gram-negative microbiota, including B. forsythus and C. rectus. The data suggest that B. forsythus C. rectus and S. noxia were major species characterizing sites converting from periodontal health to disease. The differences in location and microbiota of interproximal and buccal active sites suggested that different mechanisms may be involved in increased attachment loss.

A 10-year study of the progression of destructive periodontal disease in adult and elderly Chinese

This study describes the progression of destructive periodontal disease among Chinese aged 20 to 80 with limited access to dental health facilities and minimal traditions for oral hygiene procedures. These individuals were followed for 10 years to determine whether the rates for progression of periodontal disease were markedly different than for populations with more access to oral health care. At baseline, participants had been examined for tooth mobility, plaque, calculus, gingival conditions, attachment levels, and probing depths on 4 sites of each tooth present. These probing depth and attachment level recordings were repeated at follow-up, although third molars were excluded from examination. A total of 398 persons remained dentate at follow-up. The analysis demonstrated that virtually all subjects experienced > or = 2 mm attachment loss over the 10-year period, and frequently in a large proportion of the sites present. Attachment loss > or = 3 mm was also widespread, but the distribution of persons according to the extent of > or = 3 mm attachment loss was positively skewed in all age groups. Positive skewness was even more pronounced when attachment loss of > or = 4 mm was considered. Some types of teeth, such as mandibular incisors and maxillary molars, had higher progression rates than did, for example, maxillary incisors. The mean individual attachment loss rates did not differ significantly between age groups, and were remarkably similar to those reported for populations whose access to and tradition for oral health care is widespread.

Evaluation of oral hygiene products: science is true; don't be misled by the facts

Most people in industrialized countries use oral hygiene products. When an oral health benefit is expected, it is important that sufficient scientific evidence exist to support such claims. Ideally, data should be cumulative derived from studies in vitro and in vivo. The data should be available to the profession for evaluation by publication in refereed scientific journals. Terms and phrases require clarification, and claims made by implication or derived by inference must be avoided. Similarity in products is not necessarily proof per se of efficacy. Studies in vitro and in vivo should follow the basic principles of scientific research. Studies must be ethical, avoid bias and be suitably controlled. A choice of controls will vary depending on whether an agent or a whole product is evaluated and the development stage of a formulation. Where appropriate, new products should be compared with products already available and used by the general public. Conformity with the guidelines for good clinical practice appears to be a useful way of validating studies and a valuable guide to the profession. Studies should be designed with sufficient power to detect statistically significant differences if these exist. However, consideration must be given to the clinical significance of statistically significant differences between formulations since these are not necessarily the same. Studies in vitro provide supportive data but extrapolation to clinical effect is difficult and even misleading, and such data should not stand alone as proof of efficacy of a product. Short-term studies in vivo provide useful information, particularly at the development stage. Ideally, however, products should be proved effective when used in the circumstances for which they are developed. Nevertheless, a variety of variable influence the outcome of home-use studies, and the influence of the variable cannot usually be calculated. Although rarely considered, the cost-benefit ratio of some oral hygiene products needs to be considered.

Is the chemical prevention of gingivitis necessary to prevent severe periodontitis?

Gingival inflammation seldom causes discomfort, social embarrassment or loss of function. As most sites with gingival inflammation do not progress to severe periodontal disease, gingivitis should not be considered a public health problem. Periodontitis is always preceded by gingivitis. But most gingivitis remains stable for years without progressing to periodontitis. The number of gingivitis sites that do convert is small. The levels of oral cleanliness achieved by the majority of populations in industrialized countries are below the threshold for severe destructive periodontal disease of personal and public health concern. Because methods of measuring the progression of periodontal disease are unreliable, definitive answers regarding conversion of gingivitis to severe periodontitis are lacking. Gingival inflammation frequently remains contained; most gingivitis remains stable for years without progressing to periodontitis. Decreasing gingivitis does reduce shallow pocketing, but the effect on severe periodontitis is not clear. Although the underlying justification for the reduction of plaque is to reduce gingival inflammation to prevent or reduce severe periodontitis and tooth loss, the basis for the approach is equivocal. A reasonably high level of plaque appears to be compatible with acceptably low levels of periodontal disease. Reducing nonspecific plaque levels to such levels is therefore a rational goal. The conventional methods of controlling periodontal disease involve mechanical removal of plaque and calculus. A complimentary ecological approach, using chemicals, would be to alter the environment of the pocket to prevent growth of putative pathogens. Any ecological approach should be sensitive to the dangers of disrupting the natural ecology of dental plaque. Some antimicrobial and antimetabolic agents such as fluoride, chlorhexidine and triclosan and zinc citrate can selectively suppress certain organisms or inhibit bacterial proteases implicated in tissue damage. The uncertainties about factors that convert gingival inflammation into periodontitis and periodontitis into severe periodontitis coupled with insufficient data from controlled clinical trials on the effectiveness of chemical reduction of gingivitis to prevent severe periodontitis leads one to conclude that more research is required before the need for the chemical prevention of gingivitis to prevent severe periodontitis can be justified.

Supportive care after active periodontal treatment: a review

This review concerns the most significant questions regarding supportive (maintenance) care after active periodontal treatment: the effectiveness and ideal frequency of maintenance appointments, the adequacy of the supportive therapy according to patient needs, the possible alternatives to currently accepted protocols, and the relative value of personal oral hygiene in the overall context of supportive care. Periodontal diseases are infections with a high potential for recurrence, progressive loss of attachment and eventually, tooth loss. Current therapies for periodontal diseases are highly predictable in arresting disease activity. Supportive periodontal care has been shown to be very effective in maintaining support when adapted to each particular case. Nevertheless, current maintenance therapies may be unsuccessful in preventing further loss of attachment in a small number of sites for some patients. Tests aiming at bacterial identification and the subgingival application of antimicrobials may be helpful in the management of such cases, however the practical value in a specific setting is not known. There is growing evidence of the fundamental role of personal oral hygiene in supportive periodontal care. In cases with rapid and severe periodontal destruction and where local and/or systemic risk factors are present, personal oral hygiene becomes a key factor in the long-term preservation of periodontal support.

Periodontal status among male industrial workers in southern Finland with or without access to subsidized dental care

The association between subsidized dental care and periodontal status was studied in male industrial workers in southern Finland in 1994. Clinical examinations and a multiple-choice questionnaire were completed for 325 workers (age, 38-65 years) with access to subsidized dental care and 174 controls without access. The CPITN scores based on full-mouth recordings were analyzed, using both the individual and sextant as units of analysis. Overall, 6% of the subsidized group and 2% of the control group had no periodontal treatment need (p < 0.05). Deep pockets > or = 6 mm were found in 5% of the subsidized workers and 11% of the controls (p < 0.05). In the logistic regression analyses the probability of calculus was negatively associated with access to subsidized dental care. Smoking was the strongest independent factor affecting periodontal status. Our findings show a positive relationship between access to subsidized dental care and periodontal status.

Clinical, microbiological and immunological profile of healthy, gingivitis and putative active periodontal subjects

Thirteen periodontally healthy subjects were monitored clinically for 6-12 months. Clinical measurements at 6-weekly intervals included duplicate PD measurements, presence of plaque, redness, and bleeding on probing. Baseline measurements consisted of 2 visits 1 wk apart. Microbial samples were taken from 11 of the subjects who had completed at least 8 months of monitoring. Levels of serum antibodies to 12 periodontal species were determined from 10 subjects. Standard deviations of replicate PD measurements, computed for each subject, ranged from 0.2-0.3 mm over the monitoring period. Plaque and redness increased during monitoring, and showed a weak association with PD change. Baseline and follow-up distributions of PD changes indicated that changes of > 1.5 mm could reasonably be considered to represent active sites. Five subjects demonstrated at least 1 site deepening by 1.5 mm over the period monitored, and these were considered putative active subjects. Sites from 2 subjects showed PD increases in the 6 wk just before sampling, and these were considered to represent active sites. Species associated with putative active subjects included Actinomyces naeslundii, Veillonella parvula, Selenomonas noxia and Prevotella nigrescens. Streptococcus sanguis, S. gordonii and Peptostreptococcus micros were associated with inactive subjects. S. gordonii and S. oralis were associated with health, whereas P. nigrescens was associated with gingivitis. Elevated serum antibodies were detected to A. actinomycetemcomitans in 4 subjects. The predominant microbiota of putative active subjects included some species previously associated with gingivitis, and some species previously associated with progressing periodontitis.

Local and systemic chemotherapy in the management of periodontal disease: an opinion and review of the concept

Periodontal disease appears to arise from the interaction of pathogenic bacteria with a susceptible host. The main aims of disease management have been to establish a high standard of oral hygiene and to professionally and thoroughly debride the root surface Chemical agents could be considered for both aspects of management. Chemoprevention using supragingivally delivered agents such as chlorhexidine may be questioned for value in the pre-treatment hygiene phase but have well-established efficacy immediately preoperatively and during the post-operative weeks. Long-term maintenance use of chlorhexidine is problematic due to local side effects. Antiplaque toothpastes show modest benefits to gingivitis but are not proven to prevent recurrence of periodontitis. Chemotherapy may be directed at subgingival plaque, using antimicrobials, or at the host response using anti-inflammatory agents. Antimicrobials can be locally or systemically delivered. In most cases antimicrobial chemotherapy should be considered adjunctive to mechanical debridement. The advantages of local and systemic chemotherapy must be balanced against the disadvantages and potential side effects of agents. Antimicrobial chemotherapy offers little or no benefit to the treatment of most chronic adult periodontitis patients and should be reserved for the more rapid or refractory types of disease, and after the debridement phase. Despite the large number of studies there are insufficient comparative data to support any one local delivery system or systemic regimen as superior to another. Systemic versus local antimicrobials have not been compared to date. Host response modifying drugs such as non-steriodal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) offer the potential to reduce breakdown and promote healing, including bone regeneration. However until more data are available, NSAIDs should not be used in the management of chronic periodontal diseases, there being no specific agent(s) or regimen established for use. Chemotherapy has an important place in the management of chronic periodontal diseases but routine use must be considered as an over prescription of these valuable agents.

Rationale of mechanical plaque control

Patients who have received extensive periodontal treatment also demonstrate a high susceptibility to periodontal disease. Maintenance of periodontal health following therapy includes a lifelong supportive care consisting of daily removal of the microbial plaque by the patient, supplemented by professional care in an individually designed programme. Mechanical supragingival plaque control by self care is of utmost importance. The goal is to create a positive attitude by information and motivation to give the patient knowledge and confidence. The patient should be advised to use appropriate aids and technique. A soft brush, an interspace brush, interdental tooth brushes or tooth picks are recommended in periodontal patients. Professional tooth cleaning involves removal of supragingival plaque from all tooth surfaces using mechanically driven instruments and fluoride prophy paste and, when indicated, removal of calculus and subgingival plaque. Disclosing solution is used to visualize the plaque to the patient and to the clinician in order to reinforce instruction in oral hygiene. Oral hygiene measures alone seem to have limited effect on subgingival microflora in cases of severe disease. In shallow and moderately deep pockets a good plaque control can change the subgingival flora towards a more "healthy" composition. Subgingival plaque removal is performed with hand- and/or ultrasonic instruments. Cracks within the cementum, grooves, fissures, resorption lacunae, furcations may create difficulties in cleaning the root surface. Ultrasonic instrumentation has a beneficial effect in creating a smooth surface without extensive removal of cementum. Besides, the cavitational activity contributes to plaque removal which makes the instrument further suitable during maintenance therapy. The result of the debridement is assessed on the healing response in the tissues. The frequency of maintenance visits must be given on an individual basis according to the needs of every special patient. The visit includes plaque evaluation (disclosion), oral hygiene instruction, probing depth measurements, registration of bleeding on probing, scaling (plaque removal) if indicated, tooth polishing, fluoride application and radiographs if indicated. The goal is to identify and treat signs of recurrence of periodontal disease in order to prevent further loss of attachment.

Microbiological monitoring

If periodontal disease is due to a limited number of bacterial species, then continuous maximal plaque suppression is not the only possibility for prevention and therapy. Specific elimination or reduction of pathogenic bacteria from plaque becomes a valid alternative. Recent studies indicate that the elimination of certain putative pathogens is particularly difficult. New diagnostic methods should allow the choice of better suited procedures, make chosen procedures more effective (through better timing, dosage, selection of devices or drugs, increase of specificity, etc.) or lead to the elimination of unnecessary work (e.g., the treatment of non-susceptible sites or patients). The benefit of newly proposed tests depends on the possible impact of the obtained information on clinical decisions and on the consequences these decisions have for treatment. Thus, diagnostic methods and therapeutical options have to be evaluated together.

Influence of retinoic acid on the expression of cytokeratins, vimentin and ICAM-1 in human gingival epithelia in vitro

Phenotypic differences exist in vivo between junctional (JE) and oral gingival (OGE) epithelia and an in vitro system has been developed that maintains phenotypic differences. This system, which permits in vitro studies of factors that may influence the epithelial phenotype, was used to investigate the effects of retinoic acid (RA) on epithelial expression of various markers known to distinguish JE from OGE. Primary cultures of JE and OGE were initiated from defined gingival regions and were subcultured and grown for 48 h in 96-well plates or on multiple-well slides. Control cultures were grown in medium supplemented with delipidized serum and all-trans RA was added to experimental groups. Other cultures were grown in a defined RA-free medium. Cultures were examined using monoclonal antibodies against cytokeratins, vimentin, and ICAM-1 and binding displayed by indirect immunocytochemical staining. Staining reactions were assessed by direct microscopic observation and assayed by spectrophotometric quantitation. The results showed that RA had minor effects on the marker expression of JE but markedly enhanced expression of cytokeratins 8, 18, 19, vimentin and ICAM-1 in OGE. These markers, which normally distinguish JE from OGE, were expressed at levels approaching or exceeding those of control JE cultures. These observations indicate that RA responsive mechanisms affect the phenotypes expressed by epithelia in vitro and suggest that such mechanisms may be related to the different phenotypic patterns expressed by gingival epithelia in vivo.

Utilization of dental services as a risk factor for periodontitis

The relation between utilization of dental services from community dentists and the extent and severity of alveolar bone loss is reported for a panel of men followed for over 6 years. Oral health data were collected by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Dental Longitudinal Study, which began in 1969 and still continues. Participants have received regular oral examinations approximately every 3 years. A variety of oral health conditions were assessed, including plaque, calculus, gingival inflammation, probing depth, tooth mobility, clinical attachment level, and alveolar bone loss. Utilization data were abstracted from the dental records of dental offices that participants attended from 1979 through 1988. Multivariate modeling as well as comparisons of high utilizers and non-utilizers indicate that utilization of routine diagnostic and preventive services was not predictive of the extent and severity of periodontitis.

Type I collagen carboxyterminal telopeptide in human gingival crevicular fluid in different clinical conditions and after periodontal treatment

A total of 126 gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) samples were collected from 20 adults using paper strips. Patients were divided into a periodontitis-affected group (13 subjects) and a periodontitis-free group (7 subjects) by pocket depth and radiological bone loss. 4 subjects from the periodontitis-affected group received a single episode of periodontal treatment (scaling, root planing and curettage) and GCF samples were collected 2, 5, 10, 20 and 40 days after treatment. Type I collagen carboxyterminal telopeptide (ICTP) in GCF was extracted into saline solution and determined by a radioimmunological method. Mean GCF ICTP concentration was 425 micrograms/l (SEM 45) in periodontitis patients and 148 micrograms/l (SEM 25) in periodontitis-free subjects, i.e., GCF ICTP concentrations were about 100 x higher than serum reference values. Significant positive correlations were found between GCF ICTP total amount per site and plaque index (R = 0.362), papilla bleeding index (R = 0.259), pocket depth (R = 0.464) and radiological bone loss (R = 0.418). Periodontal treatment decreased GCF ICTP concentration to the level seen in healthy subjects. However, large variations were seen between subjects and sites. ICTP levels below the detection limit were often found in deep pockets, as well as high values in periodontitis-free subjects. It was concluded that GCF ICTP reflects the local type I collagen degradation in periodontal tissues, and probably gives information about the tissue destruction process beyond the reach of the clinical parameters.