Paul I. Eke

Prevalence of Periodontitis in Adults in the United States: 2009 and 2010

This study estimated the prevalence, severity, and extent of periodontitis in the adult U.S. population, with data from the 2009 and 2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) cycle. Estimates were derived from a sample of 3,742 adults aged 30 years and older, of the civilian non-institutionalized population, having 1 or more natural teeth. Attachment loss (AL) and probing depth (PD) were measured at 6 sites per tooth on all teeth (except the third molars). Over 47% of the sample, representing 64.7 million adults, had periodontitis, distributed as 8.7%, 30.0%, and 8.5% with mild, moderate, and severe periodontitis, respectively. For adults aged 65 years and older, 64% had either moderate or severe periodontitis. Eighty-six and 40.9% had 1 or more teeth with AL ≥ 3 mm and PD ≥ 4 mm, respectively. With respect to extent of disease, 56% and 18% of the adult population had 5% or more periodontal sites with ≥ 3 mm AL and ≥ 4 mm PD, respectively. Periodontitis was highest in men, Mexican Americans, adults with less than a high school education, adults below 100% Federal Poverty Levels (FPL), and current smokers. This survey has provided direct evidence for a high burden of periodontitis in the adult U.S. population.

Case Definitions for Use in Population-Based Surveillance of Periodontitis

Many definitions of periodontitis have been used in the literature for population-based studies, but there is no accepted standard. In early epidemiologic studies, the two major periodontal diseases, gingivitis and periodontitis, were combined and considered to be a continuum. National United States surveys were conducted in 1960 to 1962, 1971 to 1974, 1981, 1985 to 1986, 1988 to 1994, and 1999 to 2000. The case definitions and protocols used in the six national surveys reflect a continuing evolution and improvement over time. Generally, the clinical diagnosis of periodontitis is based on measures of probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), the radiographic pattern and extent of alveolar bone loss, gingival inflammation measured as bleeding on probing, or a combination of these measures. Several other patient characteristics are considered, and several factors, such as age, can affect measurements of PD and CAL. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements of PD and CAL are important because case definitions for periodontitis are based largely on either or both measurements, and relatively small changes in these values can result in large changes in disease prevalence. The classification currently accepted by the American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) was devised by the 1999 International Workshop for a Classification of Periodontal Diseases and Conditions. However, in 2003 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the AAP appointed a working group to develop further standardized clinical case definitions for population-based studies of periodontitis. This classification defines severe periodontitis and moderate periodontitis in terms of PD and CAL to enhance case definitions and further demonstrates the importance of thresholds of PD and CAL and the number of affected sites when determining prevalence.

Update on Prevalence of Periodontitis in Adults in the United States: NHANES 2009 to 2012

BACKGROUND This report describes prevalence, severity, and extent of periodontitis in the US adult population using combined data from the 2009 to 2010 and 2011 to 2012 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). METHODS Estimates were derived for dentate adults, aged ≥30 years, from the US civilian non-institutionalized population. Periodontitis was defined by combinations of clinical attachment loss (AL) and periodontal probing depth (PD) from six sites per tooth on all teeth, except third molars, using standard surveillance case definitions. For the first time in NHANES history, sufficient numbers of non-Hispanic Asians were sampled in 2011 to 2012 to provide reliable estimates of their periodontitis prevalence. RESULTS In 2009 to 2012, 46% of US adults, representing 64.7 million people, had periodontitis, with 8.9% having severe periodontitis. Overall, 3.8% of all periodontal sites (10.6% of all teeth) had PD ≥4 mm, and 19.3% of sites (37.4% teeth) had AL ≥3 mm. Periodontitis prevalence was positively associated with increasing age and was higher among males. Periodontitis prevalence was highest in Hispanics (63.5%) and non-Hispanic blacks (59.1%), followed by non-Hispanic Asian Americans (50.0%), and lowest in non-Hispanic whites (40.8%). Prevalence varied two-fold between the lowest and highest levels of socioeconomic status, whether defined by poverty or education. CONCLUSIONS This study confirms a high prevalence of periodontitis in US adults aged ≥30 years, with almost fifty-percent affected. The prevalence was greater in non-Hispanic Asians than non-Hispanic whites, although lower than other minorities. The distribution provides valuable information for population-based action to prevent or manage periodontitis in US adults.

Update of the Case Definitions for Population-Based Surveillance of Periodontitis

BACKGROUND This report adds a new definition for mild periodontitis that allows for better descriptions of the overall prevalence of periodontitis in populations. In 2007, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in partnership with the American Academy of Periodontology developed and reported standard case definitions for surveillance of moderate and severe periodontitis based on measurements of probing depth (PD) and clinical attachment loss (AL) at interproximal sites. However, combined cases of moderate and severe periodontitis are insufficient to determine the total prevalence of periodontitis in populations. METHODS The authors proposed a definition for mild periodontitis as ≥ 2 interproximal sites with AL ≥ 3 mm and ≥ 2 interproximal sites with PD ≥ 4 mm (not on the same tooth) or one site with PD ≥ 5 mm . The effect of the proposed definition on the total burden of periodontitis was assessed in a convenience sample of 456 adults ≥ 35 years old and compared with other previously reported definitions for similar categories of periodontitis. RESULTS Addition of mild periodontitis increases the total prevalence of periodontitis by ≈31% in this sample when compared with the prevalence of severe and moderate disease. CONCLUSION Total periodontitis using the case definitions in this study should be based on the sum of mild, moderate, and severe periodontitis.

Periodontal Disease and Coronary Heart Disease A Reappraisal of the Exposure

Background—Results from studies relating periodontal disease to cardiovascular disease have been mixed. Residual confounding by smoking and use of clinical measures of periodontal disease rather than measures of infection have been 2 major criticisms. The aims of this study were to investigate relationships between prevalent coronary heart disease (CHD) and 2 exposures, (1) clinical periodontal disease and (2) IgG antibodies to 17 oral organisms, and to evaluate the role of smoking in these relationships. Methods and Results—Our study is based on a subset of participants in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, who received a complete periodontal examination during visit 4 (1996–1998). The exposures were periodontal status and serum IgG antibody levels against 17 periodontal organisms, and the outcome was prevalent CHD at visit 4. Multivariable analyses indicate that periodontal status is not significantly associated with CHD in either ever smokers or never smokers. Similar analyses evaluating antibodies indicate that high antibodies (above the median) to Treponema denticola (odds ratio [OR]=1.7; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.3), Prevotella intermedia (OR=1.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.0), Capnocytophaga ochracea (OR=1.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.1), and Veillonella parvula (OR=1.7; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.3) are significantly associated with CHD among ever smokers, whereas Prevotella nigrescens (OR=1.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.6), Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans (OR=1.7; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.7), and Capnocytophaga ochracea (OR=2.0; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.0) were associated with CHD among never smokers. Conclusions—Clinical signs of periodontal disease were not associated with CHD, whereas systemic antibody response was associated with CHD in ever smokers and never smokers. These findings indicate that the quality and quantity of the host response to oral bacteria may be an exposure more relevant to systemic atherothrombotic coronary events than clinical measures.

Accuracy of NHANES Periodontal Examination Protocols

This study evaluates the accuracy of periodontitis prevalence determined by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) partial-mouth periodontal examination protocols. True periodontitis prevalence was determined in a new convenience sample of 454 adults ≥ 35 years old, by a full-mouth “gold standard” periodontal examination. This actual prevalence was compared with prevalence resulting from analysis of the data according to the protocols of NHANES III and NHANES 2001-2004, respectively. Both NHANES protocols substantially underestimated the prevalence of periodontitis by 50% or more, depending on the periodontitis case definition used, and thus performed below threshold levels for moderate-to-high levels of validity for surveillance. Adding measurements from lingual or interproximal sites to the NHANES 2001-2004 protocol did not improve the accuracy sufficiently to reach acceptable sensitivity thresholds. These findings suggest that NHANES protocols produce high levels of misclassification of periodontitis cases and thus have low validity for surveillance and research.

Standards for reporting chronic periodontitis prevalence and severity in epidemiologic studies: Proposed standards from the Joint EU/USA Periodontal Epidemiology Working Group.

Periodontal diseases are common and their prevalence varies in different populations. However, prevalence estimates are influenced by the methodology used, including measurement techniques, case definitions, and periodontal examination protocols, as well as differences in oral health status. As a consequence, comparisons between populations are severely hampered and inferences regarding the global variation in prevalence can hardly be drawn. To overcome these limitations, the authors suggest standardized principles for the reporting of the prevalence and severity of periodontal diseases in future epidemiological studies. These principles include the comprehensive reporting of the study design, the recording protocol, and specific subject-related and oral data. Further, a range of periodontal data should be reported in the total population and within specific age groups. Periodontal data include the prevalence and extent of clinical attachment loss (CAL) and probing depth (PD) on site and tooth level according to specific thresholds, mean CAL/PD, the CDC/AAP case definition, and bleeding on probing. Consistent implementation of these standards in future studies will ensure improved reporting quality, permit meaningful comparisons of the prevalence of periodontal diseases across populations, and provide better insights into the determinants of such variation.

The association between depression and anxiety and use of oral health services and tooth loss

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study is to examine the associations among depression, anxiety, use of oral health services, and tooth loss. METHODS Data were analysed for 80 486 noninstitutionalized adults in 16 states who participated in the 2008 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Binomial and multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to estimate predicted marginals, adjusted prevalence ratios, adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS The unadjusted prevalence for use of oral health services in the past year was 73.1% [standard error (SE), 0.3%]. The unadjusted prevalence by level of tooth loss was 56.1% (SE, 0.4%) for no tooth loss, 29.6% (SE, 0.3%) for 1-5 missing teeth, 9.7% (SE, 0.2%) for 6-31 missing teeth and 4.6% (SE, 0.1%) for total tooth loss. Adults with current depression had a significantly higher prevalence of nonuse of oral health services in the past year than those without this disorder (P < 0.001), after adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, marital status, employment status, adverse health behaviours, chronic conditions, body mass index, assistive technology use and perceived social support. In logistic regression analyses employing tooth loss as a dichotomous outcome (0 versus ≥1) and as a nominal outcome (0 versus 1-5, 6-31, or all), adults with depression and anxiety were more likely to have tooth loss. Adults with current depression, lifetime diagnosed depression and lifetime diagnosed anxiety were significantly more likely to have had at least one tooth removed than those without each of these disorders (P < 0.001 for all), after fully adjusting for evaluated confounders (including use of oral health services). The adjusted odds of being in the 1-5 teeth removed, 6-31 teeth removed, or all teeth removed categories versus 0 teeth removed category were increased for adults with current depression versus those without (AOR = 1.35; 95% CI = 1.14-1.59; AOR = 1.83; 95% CI = 1.51-2.22; and AOR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.11-1.86, respectively). The adjusted odds of being in the 1-5 teeth removed and 6-31 teeth removed categories versus 0 teeth removed category were also increased for adults with lifetime diagnosed depression or anxiety versus those without each of these disorders. CONCLUSIONS Use of oral health services and tooth loss was associated with depression and anxiety after controlling for multiple confounders.

Self-reported Measures for Surveillance of Periodontitis

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of self-reported measures in predicting periodontitis in a representative US adult population, based on 2009-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data. Self-reported gum health and treatment history, loose teeth, bone loss around teeth, tooth not looking right, and use of dental floss and mouthwash were obtained during in-home interviews and validated against full-mouth clinically assessed periodontitis in 3,743 US adults 30 years and older. All self-reported measures (> 95% item response rates) were associated with periodontitis, and bivariate correlations between responses to these questions were weak, indicating low redundancy. In multivariable logistic regression modeling, the combined effects of demographic measures and responses to 5 self-reported questions in predicting periodontitis of mild or greater severity were 85% sensitive and 58% specific and produced an ‘area under the receiver operator characteristic curve’ (AUROCC) of 0.81. Four questions were 95% sensitive and 30% specific, with an AUROCC of 0.82 in predicting prevalence of clinical attachment loss ≥ 3 mm at one or more sites. In conclusion, self-reported measures performed well in predicting periodontitis in US adults. Where preferred clinically based surveillance is unattainable, locally adapted variations of these self-reported measures may be a promising alternative for surveillance of periodontitis.

Advances in surveillance of periodontitis: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention periodontal disease surveillance project.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has as one of its strategic goals to support and improve surveillance of periodontal disease. In 2003, the CDC initiated the CDC Periodontal Disease Surveillance Project in collaboration with the American Academy of Periodontology to address population-based surveillance of periodontal disease at the local, state, and national levels. This initiative has made significant advancements toward the goal of improved surveillance, including developing valid self-reported measures that can be obtained from interview-based surveys to predict prevalence of periodontitis in populations. This will allow surveillance of periodontitis at the state and local levels and in countries where clinical resources for surveillance are scarce. This work has produced standard case definitions for surveillance of periodontitis that are now widely recognized and applied in population studies and research. At the national level, this initiative has evaluated the validity of previous clinical examination protocols and tested new protocols on the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), recommending and supporting funding for the gold-standard full-mouth periodontal examination in NHANES 2009 to 2012. These examinations will generate accurate estimates of the prevalence of periodontitis in the US adult population and provide a superior dataset for surveillance and research. Also, this data will be used to generate the necessary coefficients for our self-report questions for use in subsets of the total US population. The impact of these findings on population-based surveillance of periodontitis and future directions of the project are discussed along with plans for dissemination and translation efforts for broader public health use.