Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 Nov;95(11):1025-1034.
doi: 10.1002/JPER.23-0527. Epub 2024 Jan 31.

Clinical evaluation of a novel protocol for supportive periodontal care: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Clinical evaluation of a novel protocol for supportive periodontal care: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Alexandra Stähli et al. J Periodontol. 2024 Nov.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and the patient perception of subgingival debridement with either guided biofilm management (GBM) or conventional scaling and root planing (SRP) during supportive periodontal care (SPC).

Methods: Forty-one patients in SPC were randomly assigned to either treatment with GBM or SRP every 6 months. The primary outcome was the percentage of bleeding on probing (BoP) at 1 year. Moreover, pocket probing depths (PPD), recession, and furcation involvements were also measured. Full-mouth and specific site analyzes were performed at baseline, 6 and 12 months of SPC. Patient comfort was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at 12 months.

Results: At 1 year, mean BoP percentage decreased from 12.2% to 9.0% (p = 0.191) and from 14.7% to 7.9% (p = 0.004) for the GBM and SRP groups, respectively. Furcation involved multirooted teeth but no through-and-through lesions were significantly fewer in the GBM than in the SRP group after 12 months (p = 0.015). The remaining parameters showed slight improvement in both groups without any statistically significant differences between the two groups after 1 year. Pain evaluation as patient reported outcome measures (pain evaluation) was in favor (p = 0.347) of the SRP group, while overall satisfaction was similar for both groups. Treatment time was not statistically significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.188).

Conclusion: In well-maintained SPC patients, SRP protocols resulted in significant clinical improvements in terms of BoP; however, for the other clinical improvements, similar efficacy for both GBM and SRP was observed.

Keywords: dental hygiene; periodontal disease; prevention; scaling, subgingival; scaling, supragingival.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors do not declare any conflict of interest regarding the present study.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Consort flow chart.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
(A) Median BoP percentage for GBM and SRP at baseline and after 1 year. (B) Median PPD in mm for GBM and SRP at baseline and after 1 year. BoP, bleeding on probing; GBM, guided biofilm management; PPD, pocket probing depth; SRP, scaling and root planing
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Median number of sites with PPD 4 and 5 mm and concomitant BoP positivity for GBM and SRP at baseline and after 1 year. BoP, bleeding on probing; GBM, guided biofilm management; PPD, pocket probing depth; SRP, scaling and root planing
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
(A) Median number of recession for GBM and SRP at baseline and after 1 year. (B) Median recession depths in mm. (C) Median number of furcation involvements (Class I) for GBM and SRP at baseline and after 1 year. GBM, guided biofilm management; SRP, scaling and root planing
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Mean and SD of pain and overall satisfaction VAS for GBM and SRP after the SPC procedures. GBM, guided biofilm management; SD, standard deviation; SPC, supportive periodontal care; SRP, scaling and root planing; VAS, visual analogue scale

References

    1. Jakubovics NS, Goodman SD, Mashburn‐Warren L, Stafford GP, Cieplik F. The dental plaque biofilm matrix. Periodontol 2000. 2021;86:32‐56. doi:10.1111/prd.12361 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Joseph S, Curtis MA. Microbial transitions from health to disease. Periodontol 2000. 2021;86:201‐209. doi:10.1111/prd.12377 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Darveau RP, Curtis MA. Oral biofilms revisited: a novel host tissue of bacteriological origin. Periodontol 2000. 2021;86:8‐13. doi:10.1111/prd.12374 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Loe H, Theilade E, Jensen SB. Experimental gingivitis in man. J Periodontol (1930). 1965;36:177‐187. doi:10.1902/jop.1965.36.3.177 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Axelsson P, Lindhe J. The significance of maintenance care in the treatment of periodontal disease. J Clin Periodontol. 1981;8:281‐294. doi:10.1111/j.1600-051x.1981.tb02039.x - DOI - PubMed

Publication types