Familial tendency as a determinant of tooth loss during long-term periodontal therapy

A 30-year retrospective cohort outcome study of periodontal treatment of stages III and IV patients in a private practice

AIM

Tooth loss studies show that periodontal treatment is effective. However, it is not known whether these results can be projected into a lifetime of treatment. The aim of the study was to study all patients with stages III/IV of periodontitis over 30 years in a private practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients referred between 1986 and 1990 were monitored for 30 years for tooth loss and prognostic factors. All dropouts were accounted for.

RESULTS

In all, 386 patients were followed, of whom 283 patients dropped out, leaving 103 patients (67 females and 36 males, average age 40.1 years) monitored over 30 years. Tooth loss was stable until 16 years, when the population was divided into groups of low (n = 65), moderate (n = 18) and high (n = 20) tooth loss, losing 1.05 (SD 1.27), 4.83 (SD 0.96) and 11.90 (SD 4.25) teeth, respectively. The strongest prognostic factors were first-degree relatives with periodontitis, periodontal treatment before the age of 35 years, diabetes and patients with teeth with initial hopeless prognosis.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients with stages III and IV periodontitis could be successfully treated with conventional periodontal treatment over a period of 30 years. The findings suggest that retrospective studies with shorter observation times cannot automatically be projected onto the outcome of a lifetime of periodontal treatment.

Proposing a model for auditing data quality of long-term periodontal outcome studies

OBJECTIVE

The assessment of the success of conventional periodontal therapy is based on retrospective studies from private practice and university clinics. Due to their marked heterogeneity, it is difficult to assess the data quality and rate these studies. The aim is to test a model for auditing and rating the data quality of periodontal outcome studies.

METHODS

The method was adapted from the NIH Health Care Systems Collaboratory model, which uses three data quality dimensions: completeness (including all the relevant variables), consistency (ensuring that the same variables are compared) and accuracy (proportion of data in error with a gold standard). The model was applied to studies from a Norwegian specialist practice and data from the Norwegian Health database to test if the auditing process was workable using real world data.

RESULTS

Forty-seven risk and prognostic factors were included for completeness. Seven variables were specified for consistency: tooth loss, smoking, systemic conditions, oral hygiene, individual tooth prognosis, maintenance profiles and timing of extractions. The factors tested showed a 95.7% completeness and an average accuracy deviation from the gold standard of -2.3% for each of the risk/prognostic factors and an overall study score of 93.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

It was possible to develop a method for auditing and rating the quality of periodontal outcome studies. The model was tested using both real world data including risk and prognostic factors from individual outcome studies and national big data. The application of the model to these sets of data showed a high accuracy of the risk/prognostic factors and a close relationship with national big data.