ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients' self-perceived periodontal health status and to identify the association between periodontal disease (PD) and DM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 113 T1DM children between 3 and 18 years old from the Universiti Teknologi MARA and the University of Malaya. Periodontal health parameters, including plaque index, gingival index, probing pocket depth, simplified basic periodontal examination, and clinical attachment loss, were recorded. Self-perceived periodontal health status was assessed with questionnaires. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the sensitivity of the questionnaire and the relationship between T1DM and periodontal parameters. RESULTS: The median age was 11.4 years. Half of them (50.4%) were females. A total of 83.5% rated their oral condition as good, whereas 27.5% reported a history of gingival bleeding. Clinical examination revealed that 48.7% had healthy gingiva, whereas 47.8% had gingivitis. The question "Do you have bleeding when brushing, flossing, or eating food?" showed good accuracy in the evaluation of PD (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The questionnaire has a high potential to be used by medical professionals in identifying T1DM patients at risk of PD to guide nondental health care providers in making appropriate referrals to dental services.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) is the key for a stable periodontal health following active treatment. Likewise, implant maintenance is crucial following implant placement. This systematic review aimed to assess clinical outcomes, patients' perception, and cost-effectiveness of repeated periodontal therapy with air polishing devices (APDs) in comparison with hand instruments and/or power-driven instruments (conventional interventions) in SPT and implant maintenance. METHODS: Electronic search for randomised controlled clinical trials with minimum 6 months follow-up for SPT and implant maintenance programme was conducted for data published from 01 January 2000 to 30 April 2020 using multiple databases and hand searching. Risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool (RoB 2). RESULTS: A total of 823 articles were screened. 4 SPT and 2 implant maintenance studies were eligible for inclusion. For SPT, repeated APDs interventions revealed no statistically significant difference when compared to the conventional interventions (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.11 mm, p = 0.08). Likewise, no statistical difference was noted in terms of percentage of bleeding on probing (BOP) and clinical attachment level (CAL) gain. APDs were associated with lower pain score (based on Visual Analogue Scale) and higher patient acceptance in SPT studies. For implant maintenance, APDs resulted in reduction in PPD and percentage of BOP. However, CAL gain was comparable between the two groups. In terms of patient reported outcomes, no implant maintenance studies recorded any forms of patient reported outcomes. In addition, no studies reported on economic evaluation of APDs in both SPT and implant maintenance. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this systematic review and meta-analysis, repeated subgingival debridement using APDs in SPT resulted in similar clinical outcomes but better patients' comfort when compared to the conventional interventions. For implant maintenance, there is limited evidence to show that repeated application of APDs leads to improved clinical outcomes when compared to conventional treatments.
