Journal of clinical periodontology · 2014
A randomized controlled trial on immediate surgery versus root planing in patients with advanced periodontal disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Miremadi Seyed Reza, De Bruyn Hugo, Steyaert Harold, Princen Katrijn, Sabzevar Mehran M, Cosyn Jan
Аннотация
AIM: To compare immediate surgery to scaling and root planing (SRP) in the treatment of advanced periodontal disease focusing on the prevalence of residual sites and cost-effectiveness (1); to evaluate the adjunctive effects of azithromycin in a second treatment phase (2).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients (18 males, 21 females; mean age: 54.6) received oral hygiene instructions and were randomly allocated to surgery (n = 19) or SRP (n = 20). Patients with residual pockets (≥6 mm) at 6 months received re-debridement of these sites and systemic azithromycin. Treatment groups were followed up to 12 months and evaluated in terms of clinical response parameters and cost-effectiveness. Chair-time was used to assess the financial impact of treatment.
RESULTS: Both treatment arms were equally effective in terms of clinical outcome demonstrating less than 1% residual pockets at 12 months. Surgery imposed an extra 746 Euro on the patient up to 6 months when compared to SRP. At 12 months, 46 Euro of this amount could be offset as a result of a reduced need for supportive care. Only 6 patients in the surgery group needed systemic antibiotics, whereas 14 patients in the SRP needed such additional treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Although 700 Euro could be saved on average by performing SRP instead of surgery, the latter significantly reduced the need for supportive care and systemic antibiotics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients (18 males, 21 females; mean age: 54.6) received oral hygiene instructions and were randomly allocated to surgery (n = 19) or SRP (n = 20). Patients with residual pockets (≥6 mm) at 6 months received re-debridement of these sites and systemic azithromycin. Treatment groups were followed up to 12 months and evaluated in terms of clinical response parameters and cost-effectiveness. Chair-time was used to assess the financial impact of treatment.
RESULTS: Both treatment arms were equally effective in terms of clinical outcome demonstrating less than 1% residual pockets at 12 months. Surgery imposed an extra 746 Euro on the patient up to 6 months when compared to SRP. At 12 months, 46 Euro of this amount could be offset as a result of a reduced need for supportive care. Only 6 patients in the surgery group needed systemic antibiotics, whereas 14 patients in the SRP needed such additional treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Although 700 Euro could be saved on average by performing SRP instead of surgery, the latter significantly reduced the need for supportive care and systemic antibiotics.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinChronic PeriodontitisCombined Modality TherapyCost-Benefit AnalysisDental Plaque IndexDental ScalingDrug CostsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth Care CostsHumansMaleMiddle AgedOral HygienePeriodontal Attachment LossPeriodontal IndexPeriodontal PocketProspective StudiesRoot PlaningSingle-Blind MethodTime FactorsTreatment Outcome