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

Adolescents' self-reported experiences following a person-centred, theory-based educational intervention versus conventional education for improved oral hygiene: Analysis of secondary outcomes of a randomized field study

AIM

To analyse adolescents' self-reported experiences and behavioural outcomes of a person-centred, theory-based intervention in comparison with conventional information/instruction for improved oral hygiene.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were derived from a prospective, multi-centred, two-arm, quasi-randomized field study focusing on the effectiveness of educational interventions for improved oral hygiene. Dental hygienists working within the Public Dental Service, Västra Götaland, Sweden, provided treatments, and adolescents with poor oral hygiene conditions were eligible for participation. The person-centred test intervention was based on social cognitive constructs, and motivational interviewing was used as an approach in communication. The control intervention included conventional information/instructions. Clinical examinations were performed, and questionnaires were distributed at baseline and at 6 months. Three-hundred and twelve patients were enrolled, and data from 276 patients, following treatment per protocol, were analysed.

RESULTS

The test group was more satisfied with the education about gingivitis (very good: 61% vs. 37%) and communication during therapy (very good: 69% vs. 50%) and reported to a larger extent that they were much more careful regarding their oral hygiene after the treatment (30% vs. 15%) and had higher confidence about keeping up healthy gingival conditions, in comparison with the control group (all p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The person-centred, theory-based intervention was superior in terms of adolescents' experiences of education and communication during therapy and self-reported oral hygiene behavioural outcomes at 6 months, in comparison with conventional information/instruction.

Outcomes of periodontal therapy: Strengthening the relevance of research to patients. A co-created review

Periodontitis is a long-term condition affecting up to half of the population globally and causing significant impacts on life quality. Successful management depends on taking life-long ownership of the condition by those affected. There is a wealth of research to inform on management options. However, most of the research has been designed by professional experts with outcomes to gauge benefits and harms based on parameters that inform on the disease process but which might not be informative to support decision-making in people with lived experience (PWLE) of periodontal ill-health (including both patients and carers). The importance of relevant outcomes is highlighted in the concept of the "expert patient" which aims to strengthen the capacity of PWLE to make health-care choices that are important for them, elements of which are likely to be already familiar to many clinicians delivering periodontal health care. Therefore, the voice and collaboration of PWLE in research are recognised as crucial to developing high quality, relevant evidence especially for long-term conditions. In this paper, we review what is known about the relevance of treatment outcomes to PWLE. We also examine the degree to which PWLE have been involved in identifying outcomes that are important to them as well as the diversity and therefore representativeness of PWLE recruited for studies. We consider why having more relevant outcomes could enhance the expertise of PWLE in managing their periodontitis. We then conclude with key learnings from our review which we hope will encourage more rapid development of these initiatives in periodontology for the benefit of global health and wellbeing.

A randomized multi-centre study on the effectiveness of non-surgical periodontal therapy in general practice

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of two non-surgical treatment protocols for periodontitis patients in general dental practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-five dental hygienists (59 dental clinics) were randomly assigned to one of two treatment protocols: (i) establishment of adequate self-performed oral hygiene prior to a single session of ultrasonic instrumentation (guided periodontal infection control [GPIC]) or (ii) conventional non-surgical therapy (CNST) including patient education and scaling and root planing integrated in multiple sessions. Residual pockets at 3 months were retreated in both groups. The primary outcome was pocket closure (probing pocket depth ≤ 4 mm) at 6 months. Multilevel models were utilized.

RESULTS

Based on data from 615 patients, no significant differences with regard to clinical outcomes were observed between treatment protocols. Treatment-related costs (i.e., chair time, number of sessions) were significantly lower for GPIC than CNST. Smoking and age significantly affected treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences between the two approaches were observed in regard to clinical outcomes. GPIC was more time-effective. Patient education should include information on the detrimental effects of smoking.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov (NCT02168621).