Premium
An accuracy study of the clinical diagnosis of periodontitis in pregnant women
Author(s) -
Conceição Sarah dos Santos,
GomesFilho Isaac Suzart,
Coelho Julita Maria Freitas,
Brito Sheila Monteiro,
Silva Roberta Borges,
Batista Josicélia Estrela Tuy,
Figueiredo Ana Claudia Morais Godoy,
Hintz Alexandre Marcelo,
Lyrio Amanda Oliveira,
Souza Elivan Silva,
Pereira Maurício Gomes,
Loomer Peter Michael,
Cruz Simone Seixas da
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.036
H-Index - 156
eISSN - 1943-3670
pISSN - 0022-3492
DOI - 10.1002/jper.20-0441
Subject(s) - periodontitis , medicine , gold standard (test) , epidemiology , population , periodontology , gynecology , dentistry , environmental health
Abstract Background There exists a diverse range of criteria used in epidemiological studies for the diagnosis of periodontitis. The results from these studies should be evaluated with consideration to the diagnostic criteria used, and this may account for differences between studies especially in some population groups such as pregnant females. The objective is to evaluate the diagnostic criteria used in a variety of epidemiologic studies of periodontitis in pregnant females. Methods An accuracy study with cross‐sectional design was performed out from a database of 671 pregnant females, using six different sets of criteria for the diagnosis of periodontitis. Women were classified for periodontitis, as follows: Center for Disease Control and Prevention/American Academy of Periodontology (CDC/AAP, 2012 criterion), the gold standard, Gomes‐Filho et al.(2018) criterion, Albandar et al.(2007) criterion, Bassani et al.(2007) criterion, López et al.(2002) criterion, and Nesse et al.(2008) criterion. For comparison amongst the gold standard and the other criteria, sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratio were determined. Results The frequency of periodontitis ranged from 25.0% to 90.2%. The Bassani et al. (2007) criterion was found to be more sensitive among the studies, and thus more suitable for diagnostic screening studies. Gomes‐Filho et al.(2018), Albandar et al. (2007), López et al. (2002), and Nesse et al. (2008) criteria were considered more specific, which makes them more useful for studies of periodontitis with the aim of using diagnosis for confirmation of disease. Conclusions A variation in the occurrence of periodontitis was observed. The criterion must be chosen according to the research aims and population characteristics.