Premium
The 2018 EFP/AAP periodontitis case classification demonstrates high agreement with the 2012 CDC/AAP criteria
Author(s) -
Ortigara Gabriela Barbieri,
Ferreira Ticiane de Góes,
Tatsch Karen Finger,
Romito Giuseppe Alexandre,
Ardenghi Thiago Machado,
Sfreddo Camila Silveira,
Moreira Carlos Heitor Cunha
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/jcpe.13462
Subject(s) - medicine , periodontitis , predictive value , dentistry , area under the curve , population , gastroenterology , environmental health
Aim To investigate the agreement between the 2018 EFP/AAP periodontitis case classification and the 2012 CDC/AAP criteria. Materials and Methods This cross‐sectional study assessed a population‐based sample from a rural area in southern Brazil. A complete periodontal examination was performed at six sites/tooth. The periodontitis case definition was estimated and compared according to the 2018 EFP/AAP classification and the 2012 CDC/AAP criteria (reference). Diagnostic tests included sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under ROC curve (AUC). Results Five hundred and eighty‐eight subjects with ≥6 teeth each were included. Based on the 2018 EFP/AAP classification, 71.1% of the subjects were classified as stage III/IV showing 100% agreement with 2012 CDC/AAP criteria for the severe category. For the moderate and severe classification, the 2018 EFP/AAP SN was 99.8% and 100%, SP 13.6% and 43.6%, PPV 83.4% and 47.4%, and NPV 93.7% and 100%, respectively. The AUC was 0.9059 (95% CI = 0.879–0.933) and the optimal cut‐off based on the curve was stage III. Conclusions The 2018 EFP/AAP periodontitis case classification showed high agreement with the 2012 CDC/AAP criteria in a rural sample with high periodontitis occurrence.