Evaluation of the effect of non-surgical periodontal treatment on oral health-related quality of life: estimation of minimal important differences 1 year after treatment

Patient-centric periodontal research: A pioneering application of patient-reported outcome measures

Conventional dentistry or periodontal research often ignores the human component in favor of clinical outcomes and biological causes. Clinical research is driven by the statistical significance of outcome parameters rather than the satisfaction level of the patient. In this context, patient-centric periodontal research (PCPR) is an approach that considers the patient´s feedback concerning their functional status, experience, clinical outcomes, and accessibility to their treatments. It is argued that data self-reported by the patient might have low reliability owing to the confounding effect of their personal belief, cultural background, and social and economic factors. However, literature has shown that the incorporation of "patient-centric outcome" components considerably enhances the validity and applicability of research findings. Variations in the results of different studies might be due to the use of different and non-standardized assessment tools. To overcome this problem, this editorial enlists various reliable tools available in the literature. In conclusion, we advocate that the focus of researchers should shift from mere periodontal research to PCPR so that the results can be effectively applied in clinical settings and the therapeutic strategy can also change from mere periodontal therapy to patient-centric periodontal therapy.

The use of patient-related outcomes (PRO) and experience (PRE) in assessing the periodontal and implant patient

The purpose of this review was to summarize the evidence with regard to behavioral and psychosocial assessment of the periodontitis patient, the candidate for implant therapy, and the peri-implantitis patient. Periodontitis has an adverse effect on quality of life and its treatment can lead to significant improvements experienced by the patient. The latter is true for rehabilitation with dental implants, although patients harbor diverse expectations and perceptions of implant therapy, which can often interfere with satisfaction and/or influence long-term success. A thorough behavioral assessment of the candidate for implant therapy is essential, which should include, perceptions, expectations, as well as risk for behavioral disorders. Remedial action is essential to correct misperceptions and any identified risks. Finally, patients have limited awareness of limited ability to identify signs of peri-implantitis. The diagnosis of peri-implantitis can be a cause of significant distress, resentment, and loss of trust to the treatment and the caregivers. Despite documented value in clinical research, currently available instruments assessing patient-reported outcomes have little application in day-to-day clinical practice. Face-to-face patient to doctor open-ended communication remains the most effective way to comprehensively establish the long-term "therapeutic alliance" essential for the long journey for the periodontitis patient.

The economic and societal impact of periodontal and peri-implant diseases

Periodontal and peri-implant diseases result from a chronic inflammatory response to dysbiotic microbial communities and are characterized by inflammation in the soft tissue and the ensuing progressive destruction of supporting bone, resulting in tooth or implant loss. These diseases' high prevalence, multifactorial etiology, extensive treatment costs, and significant detriment to patients' quality-of-life underscore their status as a critical public health burden. This review delineates the economic and sociocultural ramifications of periodontal and peri-implant diseases on patient welfare and healthcare economics. We delve into the implications of diagnosis, treatment, supportive care, and managing destructive tissue consequences, contrasting these aspects with healthy patients.

Synergy of Regenerative Periodontal Surgery and Orthodontics Improves Quality of Life of Patients with Stage IV Periodontitis: 24-Month Outcomes of a Multicenter RCT

In stage IV periodontitis patients with pathologic tooth migration (PTM), interdisciplinary treatment includes regenerative periodontal surgery (RPS) with an application of biomaterials and orthodontic therapy (OT) to restore function, esthetics and thereby quality of life (QoL). In a 24-month randomized trial we explored the synergy between regenerative medicine and biomechanical force application. The following methods were used: Forty-three patients had been randomized to a combined treatment comprising RPS and subsequent OT starting either 4 weeks (early OT) or 6 months (late OT) post-operatively. Clinical periodontal parameters and oral health-related QoL (GOHAI) were recorded up to 24 months. We obtained the following results: Mean clinical attachment gain (∆CAL ± SD) was significantly higher with early OT (5.96 ± 2.1 mm) versus late OT (4.65 ± 1.76 mm) (p = 0.034). Pocket closure (PPD ≤ 4 mm) was obtained in 91% of defects with early OT compared to 90% with late OT. GOHAI-scores decreased significantly from 26.1 ± 7.5 to 9.6 ± 4.7 (early OT) and 25.1 ± 7.1 to 12.7 ± 5.6 (late OT). Inconclusion, teeth severely compromised by intrabony defects and PTM can be treated successfully by RPS followed by early OT with the advantage of an overall reduced treatment time. As a result of the combined periodontal-orthodontic therapy, the oral health-related QoL of patients was significantly improved. Early stimulation of wound healing with orthodontic forces had a favorable impact on the outcomes of regenerative periodontal surgery.

EXISTING EVIDENCE FOR DENTAL HYGIENE AND DENTAL THERAPY INTERVENTIONS: A DETERMINATION OF DISTINCT PATIENT POPULATIONS

BACKGROUND

Dental patients seeking care expect to receive treatment options that are supported by evidence-based dental research based on dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs). In dental hygiene and dental therapy, there is little usage of dPROs and dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) to assess the four-dimensions of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). In order to assess the current evidence for dental hygiene and dental therapy interventions, the determination of distinct patient populations is essential.

AIMS

To determine patient populations that are clinically distinct groups of dental hygiene and dental therapy patients. To provide a preliminary literature search for a systematic review to identify interventions that provide four-dimensional oral health impact information for these patient populations.

METHODS

This narrative and methodological manuscript utilizes an allied dental expert panel consisting of two dental hygienists, two dental therapists, and a moderator to generate a list of clinically distinct patient populations within the scopes of dental hygiene and dental therapy. Additionally, a preliminary literature search utilizing PubMed was completed to assess the current research within the scopes of practice of dental hygiene and dental therapy that uses dPROs and dPROMs to assess the four-dimensions of OHRQoL. The patient population list generated by the allied dental expert panel and the patient populations from the articles identified in the preliminary literature search were compared to determine the needed and available evidence for dental hygiene and dental therapy interventions.

RESULTS

There were 19 distinct patient populations derived from the allied dental expert panel. Nine of the distinct patient populations were shared in the dental hygiene and dental therapy scopes of practice, six were specific to the dental hygiene scope of practice, and four were specific to the dental therapy scope of practice. From the preliminary literature search, five distinct patient populations had corresponding research. Of those, three distinct populations were shared between dental hygiene and dental therapy, and two were dental hygiene specific. There  : were no distinct patient populations found from the preliminary search specific to dental therapy.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of research in the dental hygiene and dental therapy scopes of practice regarding utilization of dPROs and dPROMs to assess the four-dimensions of OHRQoL. In order to standardize the assessment of OHRQoL, the development of a list of distinct patient populations for dental hygiene and dental therapy interventions is essential. This initiative identifies which populations are lacking evidence and provides a pragmatic approach to conducting a systematic review to assess the four-dimensions of OHRQoL in the field of dental hygiene and dental therapy.

Assessment of early wound healing, pain intensity, quality of life and related influencing factors during periodontal surgery: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

This cross-sectional study assessed early wound healing, pain intensity, quality of life, surgical satisfaction, and related factors during periodontal surgery.

METHODS

A total of 369 patients completed the questionnaire before undergoing periodontal surgery (baseline), immediately after the operation (phase I), on the day of suture removal (phase II), and one month later (phase III). The Early Wound Healing Score (EHS) was assessed, and the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), tooth hypersensitivity visual analog scale (VAS), oral health-related quality of life measure (OHQoL-UK), and surgical satisfaction VAS were administered and analysed.

RESULTS

The EHS was 8.41 ± 2.74 and was influenced by disease severity and surgical factors. Scores on the SF-MPQ, pain intensity scores, and OHQoL-UK scores were significantly increased in phase I and decreased later. Tooth sensitivity decreased significantly one month after periodontal surgery. Psychological factors were positively related to SF-MPQ, pain intensity, OHQoL-UK and tooth sensitivity VAS scores in all phases, while disease severity and surgical factors were only related to these scores at baseline or in phases I/II/III. Surgical acceptance and reoperation willingness continuously decreased after surgery, and all these scores were related to surgical satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

EHS, pain intensity and quality of life were closely related to disease severity, psychological factors and surgical factors in phase I (i.e., immediately after surgery). The findings suggest that surgical details should be enhanced and that behavioural and psychological interventions measures should be implemented to improve outcomes during periodontal operation and during the early postoperative period as well as to improve patient-oriented periodontal surgery experiences. Trial registration This cross-sectional study did not include interventions with human participants, and all the experimental procedures involving humans in this study were approved by the Ethics Committee of West China College of Stomatology, Sichuan University (WCHSIRB-D-2020-284).

Evaluation of the Effect of Non-Surgical Periodontal Treatment on Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Periodontitis at Different Stages

Collapse

Patient-reported experiences and outcomes following two different approaches for non-surgical periodontal treatment: a randomized field study

Context

The current report is part of a prospective, multi-center, two-arm, quasi-randomized field study focusing on the effectiveness in general praxis of evidence-based procedures in the non-surgical treatment of patients with periodontitis.

Objective

The specific aims were to (i) evaluate patient-reported experience and outcome measures of treatment following a guided approach to periodontal infection control (GPIC) compared to conventional non-surgical therapy (CNST) and to (ii) identify potential predictors of subjective treatment outcomes and patient’s adherence to self-performed infection control, i.e. adequate oral hygiene.

Methods

The study sample consisted of 494 patients treated per protocol with questionnaire- and clinical data at baseline and 6-months. The GPIC approach (test) comprised patient education for adequate oral hygiene prior to a single session of full-mouth ultra-sonic instrumentation, while the CNST approach (control) comprised education and instrumentation (scaling and root planing) integrated at required number of consecutive appointments. Clinical examinations and treatment were performed by Dental Hygienists, i.e. not blinded. Data were processed with bivariate statistics for comparison between treatment groups and with multiple regression models to identify potential predictors of subjective and clinical outcomes. The primary clinical outcome was gingival bleeding scores.

Results

No substantial differences were found between the two treatment approaches regarding patient-reported experiences or outcomes of therapy. Patients’ experiences of definitely being involved in therapy decisions was a significant predictor for a desirable subjective and clinical outcome in terms of; (i) that oral health was considered as much improved after therapy compared to how it was before, (ii) that the treatment definitively had been worth the cost and efforts, and (iii) adherence to self-performed periodontal infection control. In addition, to be a current smoker counteracted patients’ satisfaction with oral health outcome, while gingival bleeding scores at baseline predicted clinical outcome in terms of bleeding scores at 6-months.

Conclusions

The results suggest that there are no differences with regard to patient-reported experiences and outcomes of therapy following a GPIC approach to periodontal infection control versus CNST. Patients’ experiences of being involved in therapy decisions seem to be an important factor for satisfaction with care and for adherence to self-performed periodontal infection control.

Registered at: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02168621).

Effect of periodontal treatment on oral health-related quality of life - A randomised controlled trial

Objectives

Periodontal disease is a chronic, infectious gum disease, which eventually leads to tooth loss, adversely affecting quality of life (QoL). Most of the research in this area focuses on evaluating clinical parameters rather than patient-based outcomes. Currently, these parameters are gaining importance along with treatment outcomes of chronic diseases and QoL. This study evaluates the impact of periodontal disease and its treatment on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL).

Methods

We recruited 90 participants who were divided into two groups. One was the test group (n = 45) that underwent non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) followed by periodontal flap surgery (SurgPT). Second was the control group (n = 45) that underwent only NSPT. Clinical parameters, plaque index, gingival index, periodontal/probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and mobility were recorded. An OHRQoL questionnaire was used to assess the functional, physical, social, and psychological domains at baseline, three, and six months.

Results

The mean PPD in the test group was 6.9 ± 0.38, 3.2 ± 0.36, 3.5 ± 0.5, and 5.8 ± 0.67, 3.13 ± 0.21, 3.73 ± 0.45 in the NSPT group at baseline, 3, and 6 months, respectively. The mean CAL in the SurgPT group was 7.07 ± 0.41, 3.56 ± 0.27, 3.74 ± 0.30, and 6.08 ± 0.16, 4.02 ± 0.17, 4.16 ± 0.19 in the NSPT group at baseline, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Both treatments resulted in reduction in all clinical parameters and were statistically significant in the SurgPT group (p < 0.001). Oral Health Impact Profile scores substantially decreased in the SurgPT group (mean difference-25.0) compared to the NSPT group (mean difference-5.0) (p-0.001).

Conclusions

In this study, NSPT and SurgPT had a positive impact on OHRQoL by improving clinical parameters, but SurgPT had substantially better outcomes in terms of improved QoL.

Oral health-related quality of life outcomes in a randomized clinical trial to assess a community-based oral hygiene intervention among adults living in low-income senior housing

Background

Quality of life outcomes have been used frequently in clinical trials of oral health interventions. This study assessed the effects of a randomized trial on oral health related quality of life comparing an individual-based oral hygiene intervention to a community-based intervention.

Methods

Participants were recruited from six low-income senior housing residences. Buildings were randomly assigned to receive the individual-based intervention followed by the community-based intervention or to receive the community-based intervention followed by the individual intervention. Participants’ oral hygiene was assessed at baseline (T0), one month after the first intervention (T1) and one month after the second intervention (T2) and six months after the T2 assessment (T3). Oral hygiene was measured by the Gingival Index (GI) and Plaque scores (PS). Surveys collected data on beliefs, attitudes, behaviors and self-reported health status at T0, T1 and T2. Only oral hygiene and quality of life, measured by the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI), was assessed at all time points. general linear mixed models (GLMM) were used to assess changes in GOHAI over time, the interaction of condition by time and the contribution of psychosocial, behavioral, health status and background variables to changes in GOHAI.

Results

331 people completed T0 assessments; 306 completed T1; 285 completed T2 and 268 completed T3. Scores on GOHAI at T0 ranged from 10 to 48 with a mean of 39.7 (sd = 7.8) and a median of 42. At T1, mean GOHAI was 40.7 (sd = 8.2), at T2 mean GOHAI was 41.1 (sd = 7.8) and at T3, GOHAI was 42.3 (sd = 8.2). GLMM showed that GOHAI improved significantly from T0 to T3 (p = 0.01) but the time by intervention interaction was not significant indicating that both interventions were effective in improving GOHAI but one intervention was not better than the other. Ethnicity, health status, worries, self-efficacy, number of missing teeth and symptoms of dry mouth were related to improvements in GOHAI. Neither GI nor PS were related to GOHAI.

Conclusions

The participants reported relatively good oral health related quality of life which improved significantly over time. Improvement occurred among all participants regardless of condition, suggesting that either intervention would be effective in future studies.

Trial Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov, Clinical Trials ID #NCT02419144; Title: A Bi-level Intervention to Improve Older Adult Oral Health Status; Registered 04/07/2015 URL: https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S0005H9X&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0000KBK&ts=2&cx=-rajj5q

Clinical study of periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival scaling in the treatment of residual pocket

OBJECTIVES

To compare the treatment effects of periodontal endoscope-assisted and traditional subgingival scaling on residual pockets.

METHODS

A total of 13 patients with periodontitis from Dept. of Periodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University were recruited. After 4-6 weeks of initial treatment, the residual pockets with a probing depth (PD) of ≥4 mm and attachment loss (AL) of ≥4 mm and bleeding on probing were examined with traditional (control group) and periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival scaling (endoscopy group) in a randomly controlled split-mouth design. At baseline and 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment, plaque index (PLI), PD, AL, and bleeding index (BI) were measured. Differences in these clinical parameters within and between groups and patient-reported outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of the 694 sites of 251 teeth were included in this trial. Both groups showed significant improvement in each periodontal parameters 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment (P<0.001). For sites in a single-rooted tooth, sites with PD≥5 mm, and sites without vertical alveolar bone resorption and furcation involvement, the PD in endoscopy group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival scaling resulted in better effects than traditional subgingival scaling when the residual pockets were in a single-rooted tooth, with a PD of ≥5 mm but without vertical alveolar bone resorption and furcation involvement.

Periodontal disease and quality of life: Umbrella review of systematic reviews

This umbrella review appraised existing systematic reviews and meta-analysis to establish the impact of periodontal disease and therapy on general and oral health-related quality of life. A systematic electronic literature search was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA guideline up to January 2020 using PubMed, LIVIVO, EMBASE and OpenGrey (PROSPERO CRD 42020163831). Hand searching was performed through the reference lists of periodontal textbooks and related journals. All English language-based systematic reviews and meta-analysis that assessed the impact of periodontal disease and treatment interventions on general and oral health-related quality of life were included. Overall, eight articles met the inclusion criteria and their methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR2 criteria. Two systematic reviews showed a significant impact of oral conditions on general health-related quality of life, although the specific impact of periodontal disease remains inconclusive. Three systematic reviews established a negative impact of periodontal disease on oral health-related quality of life. Another three systematic reviews concluded that periodontal treatment can improve oral health-related quality of life. Oral conditions, like periodontal disease, can impact the general health-related quality of life. Periodontal disease is negatively correlated with oral health-related quality of life, although treatment interventions can improve self-reported quality of life. In view of the heterogeneity of generic instruments currently utilized to assess the self-reported quality of life of periodontal patients, the development of a general and oral health-related quality of life instrument specific for periodontal disease is strongly recommended.

Determining the minimal important difference of the Oral Health Impact Profile for Chronic Periodontitis

AIM

Building on previous psychometric work, we aimed to further assess the minimally important difference (MID) of the Oral Health Impact Profile for Chronic Periodontitis (OHIP-CP).

METHODS

In total, 240 consecutive patients with chronic periodontitis were recruited in the study. The OHIP-CP was completed at baseline and after six weeks. Methodology testing included the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and MID. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to assess the fit of the previously proposed three-factor model. The MID of this questionnaire was determined by applying anchor-based and distribution-based approaches.

RESULTS

The CFA supported a three-factor model for the OHIP-CP with acceptable fit to the data. The fit indices were χ² /df = 2.231, GFI = 0.935, TLI = 0.969 and CFI = 0.976, RMSEA = 0.076. The OHIP-CP scores showed significant improvements after treatment (p < .001). The anchor-based MIDs of OHIP-CP for "oral function restriction," "oral pain" and "psychological and social impact," and total score were 2, 1, 4 and 7 points, respectively. The effect sizes (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM) for the OHIP-CP were moderate to large.

CONCLUSIONS

The MID of the OHIP-CP is recommended for interpreting clinically meaningful change in oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) over time.

Patient-based outcomes and quality of life

Patient-based outcomes complement clinical data with patients' self-evaluation of their physical, psychological, and social well-being, and as such facilitate clinical decision-making, assessing the quality of care provided, and evaluating practices and policies. Some validated generic oral health-related quality of life measures used in recent research indicated a high performance. There is a proportional relationship between the quality of life and periodontitis, ie, the higher the level of periodontitis, the poorer the oral health-related quality of life. This relationship is heightened by the presence of symptoms such as bleeding, halitosis, and mobility. On the other hand, periodontal treatment has demonstrated the capability to improve quality of life substantially. Future research should focus on questionnaires that are able to explain the interlinked pathways between periodontal conditions, approaches to treatment approaches, and patients' well-being. The acquisition of new knowledge in the field is essential for the whole community, as we treat people not millimeters.

Short-Term Impact of Non-Surgical and Surgical Periodontal Therapy on Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in a Greek Population-A Prospective Cohort Study

While periodontitis deteriorates patients’ quality of life, non-surgical periodontal treatment seems to offer an improvement. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the impact of non-surgical and surgical periodontal treatment on the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) utilizing patient-centered assessments and surrogate clinical measurements in Greek adults. Eighty-three individuals with chronic periodontitis were enrolled in the study. Assessment of OHRQoL with the use of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) questionnaire in conjunction with clinical measurements of pocket probing depth (PPD), plaque index (PI) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were performed at baseline (t0), after non-surgical therapy (t1) and after periodontal surgery (t2). A statistically significant reduction of OHIP-14 score was recorded at t1 and t2 examination compared to baseline (p < 0.001) and a statistically significant improvement in all clinical parameter at all time points was recorded (p < 0.05). No correlation between the clinical parameters and the total score of OHIP-14 was recorded at any time point. Non-surgical periodontal treatment seemed to improve OHRQoL in terms of OHIP-14 scores, whilst supplementary surgical periodontal therapy did not offer any additional benefit. No correlation was found between patients’ perception of quality of life expressed by OHIP-14 score and the surrogate clinical parameters.

Dentist-Patient Communication of Treatment Outcomes in Periodontal Practice: A Need for Dental Patient-Reported Outcomes

Periodontal practice has made tremendous progress toward evidence-based treatment over the past decade. Importantly, a new classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant treatments has recently been devised that is incorporating current evidence and enabling patient-specific periodontal care. However, this important progress can be further accelerated with the availability of patient-perceived outcomes of periodontal and implant interventions. The majority of existing clinical studies assess treatment effects based on clinician-measured surrogate outcomes, such as probing depth and attachment levels which are easily communicated to or perceived by dental patients. As dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) gain momentum in dental practice, our understanding of the true outcome of dental therapies is vastly increasing. In periodontal research in particular, the utilization of dPROs has clearly demonstrated that periodontal disease contributes to an individual's burden of disease in a substantial manner. Correspondingly, disease treatment interventions seem to lead to varying levels of patient-perceived improvements. The present editorial aims to highlight the importance of patient communication of treatment outcomes in periodontal and implant research and to review the information on available measures for capturing dPROs.

Association of oral health-related quality of life measures with aggressive and chronic periodontitis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Evidence suggests that periodontitis has a negative effect on the quality of life of an individual, with increased impacts by greater disease severity. The aim of this study was to assess the association between quality of life and the presence of different severity and forms of periodontitis (aggressive and chronic), compared to a disease-free control group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four hundred and seventy one study participants were classified according to periodontal diagnosis using the 1999 Consensus Classification into chronic periodontitis (CP), aggressive periodontitis (AgP) and periodontally healthy. Oral health-related quality of life was assessed using the OHIP-14 questionnaire. Outcomes consisted of the prevalence of oral impacts reported occasionally, fairly often or very often (OFOVO) as well as fairly often or very often (FOVO), OHIP-14 total and domain scores. Logistic and linear regression analyses were carried out to test associations between periodontal diagnosis and quality of life outcomes, adjusted for smoking, age, ethnicity and body mass index.

RESULTS

Over 90% of periodontitis patients reported at least one oral impact experienced occasionally, fairly often or very often (OFOVO) compared with 53.8% of periodontally healthy controls (P < .001). After adjustment for covariates, significant differences were found between the periodontitis groups and healthy controls for OHIP-14 outcome scores (P < .001) and across all of the OHIP-14 domains (P < .005). These differences were clinically meaningful as they were higher than the measurement errors. No significant differences were identified between AgP and CP in adjusted analysis when comparing OHIP-14 scores.

CONCLUSION

Patients with periodontitis have worse quality of life than periodontally healthy individuals, with differences being clinically meaningful. AgP patients reported worse OHRQoL overall compared to CP patients, but these moderate and meaningful differences were explained through the adjustment process.

The impact of nonsurgical periodontal treatment on oral health-related quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the impact of nonsurgical periodontal treatment (NSPT) on patients' oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). The focused question for this systematic review was: in adults patients with periodontitis, does NSPT improve oral health-related quality of life?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Five databases (PubMed, CIHNL, EMBASE, LILACS and CENTRAL) were searched up to April 2019 (PROSPERO CRD42018103393). Intervention trials and cohort studies assessing the OHRQoL data of adults with periodontitis, enduring non-surgical periodontal treatment (NSPT) were eligible for inclusion. Subgroup random-effects meta-analysis was conducted methodically.

RESULTS

Overall, 491 studies were retrieved, out of which 19 met the inclusion criteria. Two randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and ten cohort studies were further analysed. Seven cohort studies were included in the statistical analysis. Subgroup meta-analyses of cohort studies revealed that NSPT improves in average 2.49 (95% CI 0.95-4.02), 8.94 (95% CI 6.89-10.99) and 6.49 (95% CI 5.11-7.88) OHRQoL levels at 1-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 6-12 weeks of post-treatment, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

NSPT procedures greatly improve the oral health-related quality of life within a short time, remaining stable after 3 months of treatment.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This systematic review brings forward summary evidence that NSPT improves the OHRQoL in adults with periodontitis from a patient-centred perception and remain stable in the short term.

Is periodontitis and its treatment capable of changing the quality of life of a patient?

While clinical indicators, or so-called surrogate outcomes in periodontology, allow us to assess periodontal health and evaluate outcomes of periodontal therapy from a clinician's perspective, they cannot be used to evaluate patients' subjective perceptions of their health status or satisfaction with the received treatment. These can be assessed through patient-based outcomes, such as quality of life. The aim of this paper is to give an overview of the multidimensional concept of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), its measures and association with plaque-induced, inflammatory periodontal diseases. Periodontitis and its clinical consequences, such as tooth loss, have a considerable negative effect on OHRQoL, while periodontal treatment and alleviation of the symptoms can lead to improvement in OHRQoL. Implant rehabilitation of missing teeth also seems to positively influence OHRQoL.

The effect of risk communication on periodontal treatment outcomes: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study determines the effects of a routine assessment (Treatment as Usual, TAU) versus a risk communication intervention (Risk) versus a Goal-Setting, Planning and Self-Monitoring (GPS) intervention on periodontal disease patients' clinical and psychological outcomes.

METHODS

In a three-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT; registration: ISRCTN59696243) adults (N = 97) judged to have moderate oral hygiene attended a primary dental care setting for a standard consultation. Intervention participants received an individualized calculation of their periodontal disease risk using only the Previser Risk Calculator (Risk group) or supplemented with a GPS-behavioral intervention (GPS group). Clinical, behavioral and psychological measures were obtained at baseline, 4 and 12 weeks later.

RESULTS

Percent plaque reduced significantly (P < 0.05) in intervention groups but not in TAU group. Percent of sites bleeding-on-probing reduced in all groups, but the effect was more pronounced in the intervention groups. Interdental cleaning frequency improved only in the intervention groups (P < 0.05). Brushing frequency and probing depths showed little variation across time/groups. Disease risk and most thoughts about periodontal disease changed across time (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A simple behavioral intervention using individualized periodontal disease risk communication, with or without GPS, reduced plaque and bleeding and increased interdental cleaning over 12 weeks. This is the first study in the field to show that risk communication and behavioral techniques such as Goal-Setting, Planning and Self-Monitoring can improve periodontal outcomes.

One-to-one oral hygiene advice provided in a dental setting for oral health

BACKGROUND

Effective oral hygiene measures carried out on a regular basis are vital to maintain good oral health. One-to-one oral hygiene advice (OHA) within the dental setting is often provided as a means to motivate individuals and to help achieve improved levels of oral health. However, it is unclear if one-to-one OHA in a dental setting is effective in improving oral health and what method(s) might be most effective and efficient.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of one-to-one OHA, provided by a member of the dental team within the dental setting, on patients' oral health, hygiene, behaviour, and attitudes compared to no advice or advice in a different format.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 10 November 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 10) in the Cochrane Library (searched 10 November 2017); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 10 November 2017); and Embase Ovid (1980 to 10 November 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also searched for ongoing trials (10 November 2017). No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. Reference lists of relevant articles and previously published systematic reviews were handsearched. The authors of eligible trials were contacted, where feasible, to identify any unpublished work.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of one-to-one OHA delivered by a dental care professional in a dental care setting with a minimum of 8 weeks follow-up. We included healthy participants or participants who had a well-defined medical condition.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors carried out selection of studies, data extraction and risk of bias independently and in duplicate. Consensus was achieved by discussion, or involvement of a third review author if required.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen studies met the criteria for inclusion in the review with data available for a total of 4232 participants. The included studies reported a wide variety of interventions, study populations, clinical outcomes and outcome measures. There was substantial clinical heterogeneity amongst the studies and it was not deemed appropriate to pool data in a meta-analysis. We summarised data by categorising similar interventions into comparison groups.Comparison 1: Any form of one-to-one OHA versus no OHAFour studies compared any form of one-to-one OHA versus no OHA.Two studies reported the outcome of gingivitis. Although one small study had contradictory results at 3 months and 6 months, the other study showed very low-quality evidence of a benefit for OHA at all time points (very low-quality evidence).The same two studies reported the outcome of plaque. There was low-quality evidence that these interventions showed a benefit for OHA in plaque reduction at all time points.Two studies reported the outcome of dental caries at 6 months and 12 months respectively. There was very low-quality evidence of a benefit for OHA at 12 months.Comparison 2: Personalised one-to-one OHA versus routine one-to-one OHAFour studies compared personalised OHA versus routine OHA.There was little evidence available that any of these interventions demonstrated a difference on the outcomes of gingivitis, plaque or dental caries (very low quality).Comparison 3: Self-management versus professional OHAFive trials compared some form of self-management with some form of professional OHA.There was little evidence available that any of these interventions demonstrated a difference on the outcomes of gingivitis or plaque (very low quality). None of the studies measured dental caries.Comparison 4: Enhanced one-to-one OHA versus one-to-one OHASeven trials compared some form of enhanced OHA with some form of routine OHA.There was little evidence available that any of these interventions demonstrated a difference on the outcomes of gingivitis, plaque or dental caries (very low quality).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient high-quality evidence to recommend any specific one-to-one OHA method as being effective in improving oral health or being more effective than any other method. Further high-quality randomised controlled trials are required to determine the most effective, efficient method of one-to-one OHA for oral health maintenance and improvement. The design of such trials should be cognisant of the limitations of the available evidence presented in this Cochrane Review.

Nonsurgical and surgical treatment of periodontitis: how many options for one disease?

Treatment of periodontitis aims at preventing further disease progression with the intentions to reduce the risk of tooth loss, minimize symptoms and perception of the disease, possibly restore lost periodontal tissue and provide information on maintaining a healthy periodontium. Therapeutic intervention includes introduction of techniques to change behavior, such as: individually tailored oral-hygiene instructions; a smoking-cessation program; dietary adjustment; subgingival instrumentation to remove plaque and calculus; local and systemic pharmacotherapy; and various types of surgery. No single treatment option has shown superiority, and virtually all types of mechanical periodontal treatment benefit from adjunctive antimicrobial chemotherapy. Periodontal treatment, because of the chronic nature of periodontitis, is a lifelong commitment to intricate oral-hygiene techniques, which, when properly implemented, will minimize the risk of disease initiation and progression.

Chronic periodontitis and oral health-related quality of life in Chinese adults: A population-based, cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

This population-based, cross-sectional study explored the association between chronic periodontitis and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in Chinese adults, independently of sociodemographic factors and other common oral conditions.

METHODS

The present study was carried out in a sample population of 480 adults aged 35 to 74 years from Chongqing municipality. A multi-stage stratified random sampling approach was adopted to select participants. The Chinese version of the short-form oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) was used to assess OHRQoL. Chronic periodontitis was trichotomized into mild, moderate, and severe periodontitis. Logistic regression models were adopted to explore the association between the severity of chronic periodontitis and OHIP-14 scores.

RESULTS

After adjustment for sociodemographic factors and other common clinical conditions, participants with severe and moderate chronic periodontitis, respectively, had 1.63- (95% CI: 1.41 to 1.98) and 1.42-fold (95% CI: 1.29 to 1.63) higher odds for the OHIP-14 scores being above the median compared with participants without chronic periodontitis. However, participants with mild periodontitis did not have significantly higher odds for the OHIP-14 scores being above the median than participants without chronic periodontitis. Certain sociodemographic variables, including higher age, lower education level, number of missing teeth, and current smoker, had negative associations with OHRQoL.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic periodontitis was associated with poorer OHRQoL in Chinese adults. In addition, the impairment in OHRQoL showed a significant correlation with the severity of chronic periodontitis.

What makes a tool appropriate to assess patient-reported outcomes of periodontal disease?

Context

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have become primary or secondary outcome measure in clinical trials and epidemiological studies in Medicine and Dentistry in general and Periodontology in particular. PROs are patients' self-perceptions about consequences of a disease or its treatment. They can be used to measure the impact of the disease or the effect of its treatment. There are insufficient data in Periodontology related to scale development methodology although, recently, there is an increase in the number of published studies utilizing such tools in major journals.

Aim

This paper is an overview of the development methodology of new PRO tools to study the impact of periodontal disease.

Materials and Methods

The iterative process begins with a research question. A well-constructed a priori hypothesis enables validity assessment by hypothesis testing. The qualitative steps in item generation include literature review, focus group discussion, and key informant interviews. Expert paneling, content validity index, and pretesting are done to refine and sequence the items. Test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, and internal consistency reliability are assessed. The tool is administered in a representative sample to test construct validity by factor analysis.

Conclusion

The steps involved in developing a subjective perception scale are complicated and should be followed to establish the essential psychometric properties. The use of existing tool, if it fulfills the research objective, is recommended after cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric testing.

Impact of gingivitis treatment for diabetic patients on quality of life related to periodontal objective parameters: A randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

Patients with diabetes have a poor oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). It is not clear if this situation could be changed with effective periodontal treatment. This study examined both patients with diabetes and systemically healthy individuals to discover the impact of a gingivitis treatment protocol on OHRQoL and its relation to objective periodontal parameters.

DESIGN

After ultrasonic debridement, patients were randomly assigned to an essential-oils (EO) or placebo mouthwash group. At baseline and 3 months, OHRQoL was assessed with the Oral Health and Quality of Life-United Kingdom questionnaire (OHQoL-UK) along with clinical, halitometric, microbiological and inflammatory objective parameters. The primary outcome was a change in OHQoL-UK scores. A factor analysis was performed and the impact of the extracted quality of life factor (QLF) and its interactions with diabetes, treatment, and time on the objective parameters, were tested by multiple linear regression models (p < 0.05). Chi-Square test compared questionnaire-answering profiles (p<0.05).

RESULTS

Combined treatment with EO provided OHQoL improvements in both systemic conditions. Positive effect of oral health status on quality of life increased in EO groups but not in placebo groups. Question I (self-confidence) showed the greatest factorial weight, while Question A (food intake) showed the lowest factorial weight. All patients who showed OHRQoL improvements and used the EO rinse showed the lowest plaque and gingival indices and lower levels of bacteria and volatile sulfur compounds.

CONCLUSIONS

OHRQoL positively changed overtime. Most effective treatment protocols would provide better improvements in OHRQoL which is related to periodontal objective measures.

Impact of non-surgical periodontal therapy on OHRQoL in an obese population, a randomised control trial

Background

Oral Health Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) is an important measure of disease and intervention outcomes. Chronic periodontitis (CP) is an inflammatory condition that is associated with obesity and adversely affects OHRQoL. Obese patients with CP incur a double burden of disease. In this article we aimed to explore the effect of Non-Surgical Periodontal Therapy (NSPT) on OHRQoL among obese participants with chronic periodontitis.

Materials and Methods

This was a randomised control clinical trial at the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya. A total of 66 obese patients with chronic periodontitis were randomly allocated into the treatment group (n=33) who received NSPT, while the control group (n=33) received no treatment. Four participants (2 from each group) were non-contactable 12 weeks post intervention. Therefore, their data were removed from the final analysis. The protocol involved questionnaires (characteristics and OHRQoL (Oral Health Impact Profile-14; OHIP-14)) and a clinical examination.

Results

The OHIP prevalence of impact (PI), overall mean OHIP severity score (SS) and mean OHIP Extent of Impact (EI) at baseline and at the 12-week follow up were almost similar between the two groups and statistically not significant at (p=0.618), (p=0.573), and (p=0.915), respectively. However, in a within-group comparison, OHIP PI, OHIP SS, and OHIP EI showed a significant improvement for both treatment and control groups and the p values were ((0.002), (0.008) for PI), ((0.006) and (0.004) for SS) and ((0.006) and (0.002) for EI) in-treatment and control groups, respectively.

Conclusion

NSPT did not significantly affect the OHRQoL among those obese with CP. Regardless, NSPT, functional limitation and psychological discomfort domains had significantly improved.

Trial registration

(NCT02508415). Retrospectively registered on 2^nd of April 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-017-0793-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient Reported Outcome Assessment of Periodontal Therapy: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) are now regarded as a fundamental measure of therapeutic success. Patient's opinion regarding the impact of disease and its treatment is assessed using scales such as Oral Health Related Quality Of Life (OHRQoL) tools. Patient centred outcome assessment is now being considered as a primary outcome measure in clinical trials.

AIM

To evaluate whether treatment of periodontal disease could influence OHRQoL based on available literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was done in Google, Google Scholar and Pubmed for articles in English language using the terms Quality of Life or ORHQoL or PROs or patient centered outcome and periodontal therapy. The search commenced on 1st September 2016 and ended on 15th December 2016. Studies that employed one or more than one multi-item OHRQoL instrument to assess PROs related to either non-surgical or surgical periodontal therapy were reviewed.

RESULTS

Initially 423 relevant articles were obtained, from which based on screening titles and abstracts 396 were excluded. Full text of remaining 27 articles were retrieved. Nineteen clinical studies with 1345 participants and 2 systematic reviews were included after the full text review.

CONCLUSION

Both surgical and Non-surgical Periodontal Therapy (NSPT) significantly influenced the OHRQoL scores. However the change in scores after surgical therapy when compared to nonsurgical therapy was not statistically significant. There is a need for a specific PROs scale that could potentially tap the entire dimension of the change in patients' perception brought about by periodontal therapy.

A Comparison of Impact of Chronic Periodontal Diseases and Nonsurgical Periodontal Therapy on Oral Health-Related Quality of Life

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of chronic periodontal diseases (PDs) and compare phases of nonsurgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in patients attending a tertiary care center of eastern Nepal.

Materials and Methods

Matched for socioeconomic status, participants were recruited in two groups: moderate-to-severe chronic periodontitis (n = 24, 43 ± 46 years) and chronic gingivitis (n = 25, 30 ± 96 years). The treatment modalities were scaling and root surface debridement (RSD) and supragingival scaling, respectively. The impact of periodontal disease treatment status was assessed by a self-reported questionnaire of Nepali Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) at baseline and 9–12 weeks after NSPT.

Results

The median (IQR) OHIP-14 total scores for PDs reduced from 7 (3–11) to 3 (1–7.5) after NSPT. Both groups showed a significant improvement on OHRQoL (p value < 0.001). The periodontitis group showed an increased median (IQR) reduction of 52% (35.22–86.15) compared with the gingivitis group with 27% (0.00–50.00). The impact on orofacial pain, orofacial appearance, and psychosocial dimensions was observed, which improved after NSPT in both groups.

Conclusion

PDs are directly associated with OHRQoL and treatment of the disease may enhance quality of life from a patient's perspective. Scaling and RSD provided better influence on OHRQoL than supragingival scaling.

Psychological Interventions for Poor Oral Health

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to study the effectiveness of psychological interventions in adults and adolescents with poor oral health. The review follows the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. The PICO format (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) was used to define eligible studies. The populations were adults or adolescents (≥13 y of age and independent of others) with poor oral health (defined as dental caries, periodontal disease, and/or peri-implantitis). The interventions were psychological and/or behavioral models and theories, in comparison with traditional oral health education/information. The primary outcomes were dental caries, periodontitis, gingivitis, and peri-implantitis. Secondary outcomes were dental plaque, oral health–related behavior, health-related quality of life, health beliefs and attitudes, self-perceived oral health, and complications/risks. The systematic literature search identified 846 articles in December 2013 and 378 articles in July 2015. In total, 11 articles on 9 randomized controlled trials were found to meet the inclusion criteria. These reported on adults with periodontal disease, and several used motivational interviewing (MI) as their mode of intervention. The CONSORT guidelines and the GRADE approach were used for study appraisal and rating of evidence. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences in gingivitis or plaque presence. In addition, a meta-analysis on MI compared with education/information found no statistically significant differences in gingivitis presence. Only 1 meta-analysis—on psychological interventions versus education/information regarding the plaque index—showed a small but statistically significant difference. There were also statistically significant differences reported in favor of psychological interventions in oral health behavior and self-efficacy in toothbrushing. However, the clinical relevance of these differences is difficult to estimate. The certainty of evidence was low. Future research needs to address several methodological issues and not only study adults with periodontal disease but also adolescents and patients with dental caries and peri-implantitis.