Effect of subgingival scaling during supportive therapy

Jenkins, W. J.; Said, Samsiah H. M.; Radvar, Mehrdad; Kinane, Denis F.

doi:10.1034/j.1600-051x.2000.027008590.x

Cited by 42 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only one study (Jenkins et al 2000) compared directly both of the interventions of interest: supragingival prophylaxis and subgingival debridement. There was no reference to randomization of the patients who were recruited on the basis of having sites which did not respond to non‐surgical treatment comprising hygiene phase, scaling and root planing.…”

Section: Description Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supportive periodontal care: the effect of periodic subgingival debridement compared with supragingival prophylaxis with respect to clinical outcomes

Heasman

McCracken

Steen³

2002

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Description Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supportive periodontal care: the effect of periodic subgingival debridement compared with supragingival prophylaxis with respect to clinical outcomes

Heasman

McCracken

Steen³

2002

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Six studies compared PM delivered in both settings by splitting their cohorts into test and control groups to receive either specialist or PDC maintenance or PM that might be deemed similar to that delivered in PDC but which was delivered in a hospital environment (Nyman et al. , Jenkins et al …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…comparing values to pre‐APT levels, while Axelsson and Lindhe, Cortellini et al . and Jenkins et al . used the start of PM as their baselines.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Periodontal maintenance following active specialist treatment: Should patients stay put or return to primary dental care for continuing care? A comparison of outcomes based on the literature

Leavy

Robertson

2017

Int J Dental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To review the evidence for the efficacy of periodontal maintenance (PM) carried out in primary dental care (PDC) compared to the specialist setting for patients previously treated in a specialist setting for chronic (ChP) or aggressive (AgP) periodontitis. Methods:A focused PICO question and search protocol were developed. Online databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, WEB OF SCIENCE™ and COCHRANE LIBRARY were searched along with specialist journals in the subject area of periodontal research.Selection criteria included studies that investigated delivery of PM in both specialist and PDC settings for patients with ChP or AgP over a minimum 12 months. We looked for studies that reported changes in clinical attachment levels (CAL), tooth loss, pocket probing depths (PPDs) and bleeding on probing (BoP) as outcome measures.Results: Eight cohort studies were chosen for inclusion. There was considerable heterogeneity found between the eight studies, which did not allow for quantitative (meta) analysis and statistical testing of differences between groups. Clinical attachment levels remained relatively stable in patients who received specialist PM with mean changes of −0.42 mm to +0.2 mm, while for those enrolled in PDC-based PM for periods >12 months, mean CAL losses were between −0.13 mm and −2.80 mm. PPD reduction for those subjects receiving specialist PM was between 0.05 and 1.8 mm for five studies but two cohorts experienced increases of 0.32 and 0.80 mm, respectively.Increases of up to 2.90 mm (range: −0.1 to +2.90) and a higher proportion of deeper pockets were noted among PDC PM cohorts. Higher rates of BoP among those in receipt of PDC PM were reported in half of all studies. There were insufficient long-term data to make any firm conclusions about the effect of the delivery of PM on tooth loss. Conclusion:Within the limitations of the data available, it appears that specialist PM is effective in sustaining periodontal stability following active specialist intervention.There is limited evidence that PDC provides the same level of care; however, the limited comparative data available suggest that outcomes could be slightly worse in PDC. | INTRODUCTIONPeriodontal maintenance (PM) follows active periodontal therapy (APT) and aims to prevent periodontal disease progression through close monitoring of the periodontal condition along with supra-and subgingival debridement and behaviour modification. | MATERIAL AND METHODSThe following PICO question was utilized to develop our review protocol:"for patients who have received specialist treatment for periodontitis (P), does receiving periodontal maintenance in PDC (I) prove as effective as receiving it in a specialist setting (C) in preventing disease progression and recurrence? (O)" A checklist based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Metaanalyses) statement 18 was used and is summarized below (Figure 1). | Eligibility criteriaThe hierarchy of evidence search scope for this review included randomized controlled cli...

show abstract

“…1,2,3,4,5 However, during the past 20 years the subgingival scaling and root planing (SBG) has been associated to that control and this association (SPG+SBG) been recognized as the choice therapy during periodontal maintenance period (PMP). 6,7,8 Nevertheless, studies comparing this combination to other protocols were not available until recently when a clinical study 9 and two systematic reviews 10,11 suggested that the SPG biofilm control alone might be the choice during PMP. The authors showed no clinical outcomes benefits from the addition of the subgingival scaling (SPG + SBG).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microbiological outcomes from different periodontal maintenance interventions: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of subgingival scaling during supportive therapy

Abstract: These findings call into question the value of performing repeated subgingival scaling at 3-month intervals for patients with persistent disease.

Cited by 42 publications

References 28 publications

Supportive periodontal care: the effect of periodic subgingival debridement compared with supragingival prophylaxis with respect to clinical outcomes

Supportive periodontal care: the effect of periodic subgingival debridement compared with supragingival prophylaxis with respect to clinical outcomes

Periodontal maintenance following active specialist treatment: Should patients stay put or return to primary dental care for continuing care? A comparison of outcomes based on the literature

Microbiological outcomes from different periodontal maintenance interventions: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About