A longitudinal study of untreated periodontal disease

Abstract

1016 textile workers were examined during a baseline study in 1969/70. A follow-up examination in 1979/80 identified 82 subjects who had not been treated for periodontal disease in the intervening period. There were 39 male and 43 female subjects; the average age at the initial examination was 27.0 years. There was an average tooth loss of 2.5 (SEM 0.6) teeth per subject over the 10-year period. While periodontal disease was significantly related to oral hygiene at the outset, neither factor was significantly related to the degree of tooth loss. A detailed analysis of the dynamics of the periodontal condition was undertaken. The subsequent results are presented in the form of transition matrices and clearly illustrate both the progression of periodontal disease and the degree of tooth loss associated with each level of periodontal disease at the initial examination. The main findings are as follows. (a) Overall 6% of teeth initially free of periodontal disease (P.I.O.) were lost compared to 14% with destructive periodontal disease (P.I.6). (b) Progression of periodontal disease was slow for teeth initially free of periodontal disease and with mild gingivitis (P.I.0 and P.I.1) for all age groups. However severe gingivitis (P.I.2), resulted in more rapid deterioration of the supporting tissues in subjects over 35 years old at the final examination; 35% of such teeth changed to destructive periodontal disease (P.I.6) compared to 17% of corresponding teeth for the under 35-year age group. In contrast, a poorer prognosis was found for the teeth with destructive periodontal disease (P.I.6) in the younger age group.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Periodontitis Severity Plus Risk as a Tooth Loss Predictor

“…Table 3 illustrates the variation in risk level and periodontal disease severity within our study population, which is consistent with previous reports 1,10,11 Table 4. illustrates the variation in tooth loss within our study population, which is consistent with previous reports 3–8 . We compared our study population to the populations of seven studies of prevalence and tooth loss.…”

“…We compared our study population to the populations of seven studies of prevalence and tooth loss. These studies 1,3‐8 used no more than five levels of severity, and risk was not used at all. Therefore, our method of combining severity with risk increased the categories for comparison nine‐fold.…”

“…Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) show that the proportion of United States adults with periodontitis increases with age, tooth loss parallels age‐based prevalence, and periodontitis severity varies widely 1 . The variation in tooth loss in a periodontitis‐affected and untreated population is exemplified by the studies described in Table 1 3–8 . The mean tooth loss per subject ranged from 0.70 to 3.80, and the mean tooth loss rate (MTLR; number of teeth lost per subject per year) ranged from 0.14 to 0.38.…”

Disease Progression in Periodontally Healthy and Maintenance Subjects

“…The maintenance subjects lost 0.12 teeth/subject/year, whereas the rate for the prophylaxis group was 0.02 teeth/subject/year. The rate of tooth loss in our periodontal maintenance group is comparable to other reports 9–11 of annual tooth loss rates for periodontitis patients under maintenance and lower than the rates described for untreated populations 12,13 . Our data also indicated that the periodontal condition of the extracted teeth was the primary cause of tooth loss in the maintenance group.…”

A retrospective study of compliance (adherence) with a care pathway in periodontal therapy in a primary care setting

“…7 However, it is also clear from previously published papers that periodontal therapy without compliance with a maintenance regime is of doubtful value. 8 How many patients do not complete their periodontal treatment plan, or fail to attend for their SPC programme? Most reports show low levels of compliance with maintenance therapy, with results varying between 11 and 45%.…”