Major changes in the published 2018 new periodontal classification from the previous 1999 classification include new forms and categorization of the diseases, case definitions, and clinical criteria of each periodontal and peri-implant condition. This detailed information is published in the consensus report, however, it remains challenging for clinicians to clinically use this new classification. The simple flowcharts for easy periodontal diagnosis based on the 2018 periodontal classification
Conditions
Interventions
All participants were randomly allocated to group A or group B. The study was divided into 2 experimental sessions. The participants had to review the consensus reports before starting each session. P
Experimental Other,Experimental Other
Sponsors
Office of Research Affairs, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Being full- and part-time faculty members in the Department of Periodontology in accredited dental schools and private practitioners who are Board-certified periodontists 2. Participants who have basic knowledge about the 2018 periodontal classification 3. Participants who have used this classification to assign periodontal diagnoses in daily clinical practice for at least 1 year
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Participants who never received the information about the 2018 periodontal classification 2. Participants who never used this new classification 3. Private practitioners: not board-certified periodontists 4. Postgraduate students: other specialty programs 5. Faculty members, postgraduate and undergraduate students in a non-accredited dental school
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The difference in the accuracy of the periodontal diagnosis and the time spent for assigning a diagnosis between using the flowcharts and using the consensus reports The end of the intervention The difference in the accuracy of the periodontal diagnosis (points) and the time spent for assigning a diagnosis between using the flowcharts and using the consensus reports (minutes) | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The self-confidence of the participants when assigning a diagnosis and the perception of using the flowcharts The end of the intervention The self-confidence in assigning a diagnosis and the perception of using the flowcharts were evaluated by the questionnaire. The answers were rated using a Likert scale from 1 to 5. | — |
Countries
Thailand
Contacts
Public ContactPimchanok Sutthiboonyapan
Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University
Outcome results
None listed