Inter-generational continuity in periodontal health: findings from the Dunedin Family History Study

Abstract

Objective To determine whether parental periodontal disease history is a risk factor for periodontal disease in adult offspring. Methods Proband periodontal examination (combined attachment loss (CAL) at age 32, and incidence of CAL from ages 26–32) and interview data were collected during the age-32 assessments in the Dunedin Study. Parental data were also collected. The sample was divided into two familial-risk groups for periodontal disease (high- and low-risk) based on parents’ self-reported periodontal disease. Results Periodontal risk analysis involved 625 proband-parent(s) groups. After controlling for confounding factors, the high-familial-risk periodontal group was more likely to have 1+ sites with 4+mm CAL (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.11–1.88), 2+ sites with 4+mm CAL (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.03–2.05), 1+ sites with 5+mm CAL (RR 1.60; 95% CI 1.02–2.50) and 1+ sites with 3+mm incident CAL (RR 1.64; 95% CI 1.01–2.66) than the low-familial-risk group. Predictive validity was enhanced when information was available from both parents. Conclusions Parents with poor periodontal health tend to have offspring with poor periodontal health. Family/parental history of oral health is a valid representation of the shared genetic and environmental factors that contribute to an individual’s periodontal status, and may help predict patient prognosis and preventive treatment need.

Prediction of Periodontitis Occurrence: Influence of Classification and Sociodemographic and General Health Information

“…In most cases, use of proportions instead of raw numbers provided higher AUC and Sen + Spec value (Table 3, http://www.joponline.org/doi/suppl/10.1902/jop.2017.160607/suppl_file/160607_suptab3.pdf in online Journal of Periodontology ). In such a young population, the more conservative approach as cutoff point to determine presence of periodontal disease (e.g., CAL ≥3 mm in the Beck et al 31 classification and the Baelum and López 16 adolescents classification instead of CAL ≥4 mm in the Shearer et al 13 classification) yields higher AUC and Sen + Spec value (Table 3, http://www.joponline.org/doi/suppl/10.1902/jop.2017.160607/suppl_file/160607_suptab3.pdf in online Journal of Periodontology ). Also, prediction of more severe cases provided more accurate results, as observed in van der Velden 11 and Shearer et al 13 classifications (see http://www.joponline.org/doi/suppl/10.1902/jop.2017.160607/suppl_file/160607_suptab3.pdf in online Journal of Periodontology ).…”

“…Periodontal disease classifications for epidemiologic studies were developed for population‐based designs with a wide range of age groups. Thus, to demonstrate possible differences among classifications, six different classifications were used as outcomes (see http://www.joponline.org/doi/suppl/10.1902/jop.2017.160607/suppl_file/160607_suptab2.pdf in online Journal of Periodontology ) 11‐13,15,16,31 …”

“…Tonetti and Claffey 12 simplified the classification to only two categories according to AL in proximal sites. Studies with periodontal outcomes for the Dunedin cohort adopted a different classification, updated to include possibilities to determine three levels of severity and incident cases to improve longitudinal data analysis 13 , 14 . Compiling data from these studies, Eke et al 15 proposed four different degrees of periodontal tissue destruction, combining number and location of AL.…”

Family history of periodontal disease and prevalence of smoking status among adult periodontitis patients: a cross‐sectional study

“…This observation is consistent with Shearer et al . . who showed that the children of parents with poor periodontal oral health are themselves more likely to have poor periodontal health.…”

Exploring the relationship between childhood adversity and oral health: An anecdotal approach and integrative view

“…Pediatrician Thomas Boyce and colleagues studying 5-year old children have demonstrated how psychosocial, infectious, and stress-related processes seem to converge in the development of caries and thus contribute to increasing the risk that future, overall dental health be impaired [13]. The highly acknowledged, prospective Dunedin Study from New Zealand, which followed the impact of psychosocial distress on children over a period of years, has shown a clear correlation between the dental health of the children and that of their parents, reflecting social gradients [88]. In a recent US study, allostatic load, impaired dental health, and low sociocultural status have also been shown to be associated [12].…”