Prevalence of periodontitis in dentate people between 2011 and 2020: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of epidemiological studies

Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of periodontitis in dentate people between 2011 and 2020. Materials and Methods PUBMED, Web of Science, and LILACS were searched up to and including December 2021. Epidemiological studies reporting the prevalence of periodontitis conducted betw...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical periodontology 2023-05, Vol.50 (5), p.604-626
Main Authors: Trindade, Diogo, Carvalho, Rui, Machado, Vanessa, Chambrone, Leandro, Mendes, José João, Botelho, João
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Disease control
Epidemiologic Studies
Epidemiology
Estimates
Gum disease
Humans
Meta-analysis
periodontal disease
Periodontal Index
Periodontal Pocket
Periodontitis
Periodontitis - epidemiology
Prevalence
Systematic review
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of periodontitis in dentate people between 2011 and 2020. Materials and Methods PUBMED, Web of Science, and LILACS were searched up to and including December 2021. Epidemiological studies reporting the prevalence of periodontitis conducted between 2011 and 2020 were eligible for inclusion in this review. Studies were grouped according to the case definition of confidence as confident (Centers for Disease Control [CDC] AAP 2012; CDC/AAP 2007; and Armitage 1999) and non‐confident (community periodontal index of 3 or 4, periodontal pocket depth >4 mm, and clinical attachment level ≥1 mm). Random effects meta‐analyses with double arcsine transformation were conducted. Sensitivity subgroup and meta‐regression analyses explored the effect of confounding variables on the overall estimates. Results A total 55 studies were included. The results showed a significant difference, with confident case definitions (61.6%) reporting nearly twice the prevalence as non‐confident classifications (38.5%). Estimates using confident periodontal case definitions showed a pooled prevalence of periodontitis of 61.6%, comprising 17 different countries. Estimates reporting using the CDC/AAP 2012 case definition presented the highest estimate (68.1%) and the CDC/AAP 2007 presented the lowest (48.8%). Age was a relevant confounding variable, as older participants (≥65 years) had the highest pooled estimate (79.3%). Conclusion Between 2011 and 2020, periodontitis in dentate adults was estimated to be around 62% and severe periodontitis 23.6%. These results show an unusually high prevalence of periodontitis compared to the previous estimates from 1990 to 2010.
ISSN:0303-6979
1600-051X
DOI:10.1111/jcpe.13769