Clinical outcomes of single-visit oral prophylaxis

a practice-based randomised controlled trial

Clare L Jones, Keith M Milsom, Philip Ratcliffe, Annette Wyllie, Tatiana MacFarlane, Martin Tickle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)
4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background Practice-based general dental practitioners routinely provide "scale and polish" or "oral prophylaxis" to patients attending their practices. Despite its routine provision, there is no evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of single-visit scale and polish, nor the frequency at which it should be provided. A recent systematic review recommended that future trials investigating scale and polish should involve dental practice patients. Methods A practice-based parallel randomised controlled trial with 24-month follow-up was conducted. Healthy adults (Basic Periodontal Examination [BPE] codes <3) were randomly assigned to 3 groups (6-month, 12-month, or 24-month interval between scale and polish). The primary outcome was gingival bleeding with the hypothesis that 6-monthly scale and polish would result in lower prevalence than 12-month or 24-month frequency. Follow-up measurements were recorded by examiners blinded to the allocation. 125, 122 and 122 participants were randomised to the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Complete data set analyses were conducted for 307 participants: 107, 100, and 100 in the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Chi-square test and ANOVA were used to compare treatment groups at follow-up. Logistic regression and ANCOVA were used to estimate the relationship between outcome and treatment group, adjusted for baseline values. Multiple imputation analyses were also carried out for participants with incomplete data sets. Results Prevalence of gingival bleeding at follow-up was 78.5% (6-month), 78% (12-month) and 82% (24-month) (p = 0.746). There were no statistically significant differences between groups with respect to follow-up prevalence of plaque and calculus. Statistically significant differences detected in the amount (millimetres) of calculus were too small to be clinically significant. Seventeen (4.6%) participants were withdrawn from the trial to receive additional treatment. Conclusions This trial could not identify any differences in outcomes for single-visit scale and polish provided at 6, 12 and 24 month frequencies for healthy patients (with no significant periodontal disease). However, this is the first trial of scale and polish which has been conducted in a general practice setting and the results are not conclusive. Larger trials with more comprehensive measurement and long-term follow up need to be undertaken to provide a firm evidence base for this intervention. This trial informs the design of future practice-based trials on this subject.
Original languageEnglish
Article number35
Number of pages13
JournalBMC Oral Health
Volume11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 28 Dec 2011

Fingerprint

Industrial Oils
Randomized Controlled Trials
Calculi
Tooth
Hemorrhage
Periodontal Diseases
Chi-Square Distribution
General Practice
General Practitioners
Analysis of Variance
Logistic Models
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • adolescent
  • adult
  • analysis of variance
  • chi-square distribution
  • dental calculus
  • dental plaque
  • dental prophylaxis
  • follow-Up studies
  • general practice, dental
  • humans
  • logistic models
  • middle aged
  • office visits
  • periodontal index
  • periodontitis
  • single-blind method
  • time factors
  • treatment outcome
  • young adult

Cite this

Clinical outcomes of single-visit oral prophylaxis : a practice-based randomised controlled trial. / Jones, Clare L; Milsom, Keith M; Ratcliffe, Philip; Wyllie, Annette; MacFarlane, Tatiana; Tickle, Martin.

In: BMC Oral Health, Vol. 11, 35, 28.12.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jones, Clare L ; Milsom, Keith M ; Ratcliffe, Philip ; Wyllie, Annette ; MacFarlane, Tatiana ; Tickle, Martin. / Clinical outcomes of single-visit oral prophylaxis : a practice-based randomised controlled trial. In: BMC Oral Health. 2011 ; Vol. 11.
@article{cb97f57b96c04845b3c21ce4d5dead17,
title = "Clinical outcomes of single-visit oral prophylaxis: a practice-based randomised controlled trial",
abstract = "Background Practice-based general dental practitioners routinely provide {"}scale and polish{"} or {"}oral prophylaxis{"} to patients attending their practices. Despite its routine provision, there is no evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of single-visit scale and polish, nor the frequency at which it should be provided. A recent systematic review recommended that future trials investigating scale and polish should involve dental practice patients. Methods A practice-based parallel randomised controlled trial with 24-month follow-up was conducted. Healthy adults (Basic Periodontal Examination [BPE] codes <3) were randomly assigned to 3 groups (6-month, 12-month, or 24-month interval between scale and polish). The primary outcome was gingival bleeding with the hypothesis that 6-monthly scale and polish would result in lower prevalence than 12-month or 24-month frequency. Follow-up measurements were recorded by examiners blinded to the allocation. 125, 122 and 122 participants were randomised to the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Complete data set analyses were conducted for 307 participants: 107, 100, and 100 in the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Chi-square test and ANOVA were used to compare treatment groups at follow-up. Logistic regression and ANCOVA were used to estimate the relationship between outcome and treatment group, adjusted for baseline values. Multiple imputation analyses were also carried out for participants with incomplete data sets. Results Prevalence of gingival bleeding at follow-up was 78.5{\%} (6-month), 78{\%} (12-month) and 82{\%} (24-month) (p = 0.746). There were no statistically significant differences between groups with respect to follow-up prevalence of plaque and calculus. Statistically significant differences detected in the amount (millimetres) of calculus were too small to be clinically significant. Seventeen (4.6{\%}) participants were withdrawn from the trial to receive additional treatment. Conclusions This trial could not identify any differences in outcomes for single-visit scale and polish provided at 6, 12 and 24 month frequencies for healthy patients (with no significant periodontal disease). However, this is the first trial of scale and polish which has been conducted in a general practice setting and the results are not conclusive. Larger trials with more comprehensive measurement and long-term follow up need to be undertaken to provide a firm evidence base for this intervention. This trial informs the design of future practice-based trials on this subject.",
keywords = "adolescent, adult, analysis of variance, chi-square distribution, dental calculus, dental plaque, dental prophylaxis, follow-Up studies, general practice, dental, humans, logistic models, middle aged, office visits, periodontal index, periodontitis, single-blind method, time factors, treatment outcome, young adult",
author = "Jones, {Clare L} and Milsom, {Keith M} and Philip Ratcliffe and Annette Wyllie and Tatiana MacFarlane and Martin Tickle",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
day = "28",
doi = "10.1186/1472-6831-11-35",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
journal = "BMC Oral Health",
issn = "1472-6831",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical outcomes of single-visit oral prophylaxis

T2 - a practice-based randomised controlled trial

AU - Jones, Clare L

AU - Milsom, Keith M

AU - Ratcliffe, Philip

AU - Wyllie, Annette

AU - MacFarlane, Tatiana

AU - Tickle, Martin

PY - 2011/12/28

Y1 - 2011/12/28

N2 - Background Practice-based general dental practitioners routinely provide "scale and polish" or "oral prophylaxis" to patients attending their practices. Despite its routine provision, there is no evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of single-visit scale and polish, nor the frequency at which it should be provided. A recent systematic review recommended that future trials investigating scale and polish should involve dental practice patients. Methods A practice-based parallel randomised controlled trial with 24-month follow-up was conducted. Healthy adults (Basic Periodontal Examination [BPE] codes <3) were randomly assigned to 3 groups (6-month, 12-month, or 24-month interval between scale and polish). The primary outcome was gingival bleeding with the hypothesis that 6-monthly scale and polish would result in lower prevalence than 12-month or 24-month frequency. Follow-up measurements were recorded by examiners blinded to the allocation. 125, 122 and 122 participants were randomised to the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Complete data set analyses were conducted for 307 participants: 107, 100, and 100 in the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Chi-square test and ANOVA were used to compare treatment groups at follow-up. Logistic regression and ANCOVA were used to estimate the relationship between outcome and treatment group, adjusted for baseline values. Multiple imputation analyses were also carried out for participants with incomplete data sets. Results Prevalence of gingival bleeding at follow-up was 78.5% (6-month), 78% (12-month) and 82% (24-month) (p = 0.746). There were no statistically significant differences between groups with respect to follow-up prevalence of plaque and calculus. Statistically significant differences detected in the amount (millimetres) of calculus were too small to be clinically significant. Seventeen (4.6%) participants were withdrawn from the trial to receive additional treatment. Conclusions This trial could not identify any differences in outcomes for single-visit scale and polish provided at 6, 12 and 24 month frequencies for healthy patients (with no significant periodontal disease). However, this is the first trial of scale and polish which has been conducted in a general practice setting and the results are not conclusive. Larger trials with more comprehensive measurement and long-term follow up need to be undertaken to provide a firm evidence base for this intervention. This trial informs the design of future practice-based trials on this subject.

AB - Background Practice-based general dental practitioners routinely provide "scale and polish" or "oral prophylaxis" to patients attending their practices. Despite its routine provision, there is no evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of single-visit scale and polish, nor the frequency at which it should be provided. A recent systematic review recommended that future trials investigating scale and polish should involve dental practice patients. Methods A practice-based parallel randomised controlled trial with 24-month follow-up was conducted. Healthy adults (Basic Periodontal Examination [BPE] codes <3) were randomly assigned to 3 groups (6-month, 12-month, or 24-month interval between scale and polish). The primary outcome was gingival bleeding with the hypothesis that 6-monthly scale and polish would result in lower prevalence than 12-month or 24-month frequency. Follow-up measurements were recorded by examiners blinded to the allocation. 125, 122 and 122 participants were randomised to the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Complete data set analyses were conducted for 307 participants: 107, 100, and 100 in the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Chi-square test and ANOVA were used to compare treatment groups at follow-up. Logistic regression and ANCOVA were used to estimate the relationship between outcome and treatment group, adjusted for baseline values. Multiple imputation analyses were also carried out for participants with incomplete data sets. Results Prevalence of gingival bleeding at follow-up was 78.5% (6-month), 78% (12-month) and 82% (24-month) (p = 0.746). There were no statistically significant differences between groups with respect to follow-up prevalence of plaque and calculus. Statistically significant differences detected in the amount (millimetres) of calculus were too small to be clinically significant. Seventeen (4.6%) participants were withdrawn from the trial to receive additional treatment. Conclusions This trial could not identify any differences in outcomes for single-visit scale and polish provided at 6, 12 and 24 month frequencies for healthy patients (with no significant periodontal disease). However, this is the first trial of scale and polish which has been conducted in a general practice setting and the results are not conclusive. Larger trials with more comprehensive measurement and long-term follow up need to be undertaken to provide a firm evidence base for this intervention. This trial informs the design of future practice-based trials on this subject.

KW - adolescent

KW - adult

KW - analysis of variance

KW - chi-square distribution

KW - dental calculus

KW - dental plaque

KW - dental prophylaxis

KW - follow-Up studies

KW - general practice, dental

KW - humans

KW - logistic models

KW - middle aged

KW - office visits

KW - periodontal index

KW - periodontitis

KW - single-blind method

KW - time factors

KW - treatment outcome

KW - young adult

U2 - 10.1186/1472-6831-11-35

DO - 10.1186/1472-6831-11-35

M3 - Article

VL - 11

JO - BMC Oral Health

JF - BMC Oral Health

SN - 1472-6831

M1 - 35

ER -