Analysis of the Periodontal Status and the Compliance Rates when Patients Received Regular Recall and Comprehensive Periodontal Treatment Project.

• Main Authors: Chao-Han Lai, 賴昭翰
• Other Authors: Hsien-Kun Lu
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2014
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/70197506193985044454

碩士 === 臺北醫學大學 === 牙醫學系碩博士班 === 102 === Aim: Comprehensive Periodontal Treatment Project（CPTP）has been executed since 2010 in order to help people with periodontitis in Taiwan. However,there was still no strong evidence to show the longitudinal outcome of CPTP. Postcard recall system (PRS) was created to remind patients of coming back for supportive periodontal therapy (SPT). The compliance rates with SPT should be determined. The objective of this study includes (1) Comparison of the treatment outcomes between compliant patients and non-compliant patients. (2) Analysis of the treatment outcomes between people participating in CPTP as well as those receiving conventional periodontal therapy (CPT). (3) Examination of the effect of PRS on the compliance rates with SPT. (4) Investigation of the influence of predictive factors for the periodontal recurrence and tooth loss during the observational period. Material and methods: 381 patients who received periodontal therapy from Taipei Medical University Hospital were collected in this retrospective study. 161 patients were recalled for the investigation of periodontal status; while the other 220 patients were checked by their electronic charts for the degree of compliance with SPT. Recalled patients were grouped into compliance (n=94) and non-compliance (n=67). Patients in compliance under PRS and those in non-compliance without PRS were assessed and compared. Compliant patients were also grouped into CPT (n=46) and CPTP (n=48). Patients in CPT were compared with those in CPTP by periodontal parameters. The parameters that included probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque control record (PCR) and tooth loss (TL) were collected during the following period. In addition, 110 patients treated before 2010 as well as 110 patients treated after 2010 were randomly selected for the assessment of the compliance rates. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were performed to analyze the predictive factors associated with periodontal recurrence and tooth loss. Results: 161 recalled subjects who completed periodontal therapy were followed for 3.8 years. When patients in compliance (n=94) compared with those in non-compliance(n=67), they had better improvement in periodontal status. Patients receiving CPTP (n=46), as compared with those receiving CPT (n=48), had a better tendency of shallower PPD, less BOP, lower level of PCR and fewer TL. The compliance rates increased from 27% to 72% by the establishment of PRS after 2010. Age, Smoking, PPD≥7mm and PCR≥30% were found to be associated with periodontal recurrence; while age, the existence of diabetes, BOP≥30% and time elapsed since treatment were related to tooth loss. Conclusion: This study confirmed that patients had the most optimal and stable periodontal health when they received CPTP under the supervision of PRS. The compliance with SPT might control predictive factors for recurrence of periodontal disease and tooth loss.