Delphi Project on the trends in Implant Dentistry in the COVID-19 era: Perspectives from Latin America

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.Aim To establish trends in Implant Dentistry in Latin America in the COVID‐19 pandemic. Material and methods A steering committee and an advisory group of experts in Implant Dentistry were selected among eighteen countries. An open‐ended questionnaire by Delphi methodology was validated including 64 questions, divided in 7 topics, concerning the various trends in dental implantology. The survey was conducted in two rounds, which provided the participants in the second round with the results of the first. The questionnaires were completed on August 2020, and the online meeting conference was held on September 2020. The final prediction was developed through consensus by a selected group of experts. Results A total of 197 experts from Latin America answered the first and second questionnaire. In the first round, the established threshold for consensus (65%) was achieved in 30 questions (46.87%). In the second round, performed on average 45 days later, this level was achieved in 47 questions (73.43%). Consensus was completely reached on the item “Diagnostic” (100%), the field with the lowest consensus was “Demand for treatment with dental implants” (37.5%). Conclusions The present study in Latin America has provided relevant and useful information on the predictions in the education and practice of Implant Dentistry in the COVID‐19 era. The consensus points toward a great confidence of clinicians in the biosecurity protocols used to minimize the risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission. It is foreseen as an important change in education, with introduction of virtual reality and other simulation technologies in implant training

Ibero‐Panamerican Federation of Periodontics Delphi study on the trends in diagnosis and treatment of peri‐implant diseases and conditions: A Latin American consensus

Background: The social diversity, heterogeneous culture, and inherent economic inequality factors in Latin America (LA) justify conducting a comprehensive analysis on the current status and future trends of peri-implant diseases and conditions. Thus, the aim of this Delphi study was to predict the future trends in the diagnosis and treatment of peri-implant diseases and conditions in LA countries for the year 2030. Methods: A Latin American steering committee and group of experts in implant dentistry validated a questionnaire including 64 questions divided into eight sections. The questionnaire was run twice with an interval of 45 days, with the results from the first round made available to all the participants in the second round. The results were expressed in percentages and data was analyzed describing the consensus level reached in each question. Results: A total of 221 experts were invited to participate in the study and a total 214 (96.8%) completed the two rounds. Moderate (65%-85%) to high consensus (≥85%) was reached in 51 questions (79.69%), except in the questions dealing with “prevalence”, where no consensus was reached. High and moderate consensus was attained for all the questions in three fields (risk factors and indicators, diagnosis and treatment of peri-implant conditions and deficiencies, and prevention and maintenance). Conclusions: The present study has provided relevant and useful information on the predictions in the diagnosis and treatment of peri-implant diseases with a high level of consensus among experts. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of agreement in certain domains

Consistency of recommendations of clinical practice guidelines in periodontology: a systematic review

Abstract The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the methodological quality and the consistency of recommendations of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in Periodontology. An electronic search was conducted in two databases, MEDLINE and EMBASE, eight CPGs databases, and home pages of scientific societies in Periodontology up to April 2022. Three reviewers independently assessed methodological quality using the AGREE II instrument. In addition, we evaluated the consistency of the recommendations. Eleven CPGs were included, and the topics developed focused on prevention, diagnosis, risk factors, surgical and non-surgical periodontal treatment, antimicrobial therapy, root coverage, and maintenance. We found that the AGREE domains 2 (Stakeholder involvement) and 5 (Applicability) obtained the lowest scores. Domains 1 (Scope and purpose), 3 (Rigor of development) and 4 (Clarity of presentation) obtained the highest scores among the evaluated CPGs. The clinical recommendations for treatment of periodontal diseases were mostly consistent. Overall, the quality of CPGs used in periodontics was high. There was consistency of recommendations in specific fields. These findings may help researchers to promote CPGs focused on different fields of periodontics that have not yet been developed. Furthermore, the clinician will be able to make better clinical decisions

Prevalencia y factores asociados al cumplimiento de la fase de mantenimiento periodontal en pacientes del Post-Grado de Periodoncia de la Clínica Dental Cayetano Heredia

Introducción: El mantenimiento regular es esencial para el éxito a largo plazo de la terapia periodontal. Pocos estudios han evaluado el nivel de cumplimiento a la fase de mantenimiento periodontal considerando características clínicas y complejidad del tratamiento recibido. Lapresente investigación busca evaluar la prevalencia y factores asociados al cumplimiento del mantenimiento periodontal en pacientes del Servicio de Periodoncia de la Clínica Dental Cayetano Heredia. Materiales y Métodos: Se registraron todas las historias clínicas disponibles de pacientesque habían recibido tratamiento y que necesitaron alguna terapia de mantenimiento periodontal durante el periodo 2000-2005. Se evaluaron a) género b) severidad de enfermedad: representadas por presencia o no de lesiones de furcación y piezas ausentes por motivos periodontales y c)tipo de tratamiento recibido: fase inicial, tratamientos quirúrgicos no regenerativos, tratamientos quirúrgicos regenerativos, injertos gingivales, injertos óseos e implantes dentales. Resultados: La prevalencia de pacientes que acudieron a mantenimiento fue del 10,9%; 39 pacientes,mientras que 320 pacientes culminaron tratamiento sin acudir a mantenimiento. Los tratamientos con injertos óseos e implantes dentales resultaron estadísticamente significativos (p?0,5) al cumplimiento del mantenimiento periodontal. Conclusiones: Pocos pacientes que han recibido tratamiento acuden al mantenimiento periodontal, siendo los tratados con injertos óseos en bloque y/o implantes dentales los que más valoraron la fase de mantenimiento periodontal comparado a otros, quizás debido a la naturaleza compleja de su tratamiento. No se encontraronasociaciones con respecto al género y a la severidad de la enfermedad

Ibero- Panamerican Federation of Periodontics Delphi study on the trends in diagnosis and treatment of peri- implant diseases and conditions: A Latin American consensus

BackgroundThe social diversity, heterogeneous culture, and inherent economic inequality factors in Latin America (LA) justify conducting a comprehensive analysis on the current status and future trends of peri- implant diseases and conditions. Thus, the aim of this Delphi study was to predict the future trends in the diagnosis and treatment of peri- implant diseases and conditions in LA countries for the year 2030.MethodsA Latin American steering committee and group of experts in implant dentistry validated a questionnaire including 64 questions divided into eight sections. The questionnaire was run twice with an interval of 45 days, with the results from the first round made available to all the participants in the second round. The results were expressed in percentages and data was analyzed describing the consensus level reached in each question.ResultsA total of 221 experts were invited to participate in the study and a total 214 (96.8%) completed the two rounds. Moderate (65%- 85%) to high consensus (- ¥Â 85%) was reached in 51 questions (79.69%), except in the questions dealing with - prevalence- , where no consensus was reached. High and moderate consensus was attained for all the questions in three fields (risk factors and indicators, diagnosis and treatment of peri- implant conditions and deficiencies, and prevention and maintenance).ConclusionsThe present study has provided relevant and useful information on the predictions in the diagnosis and treatment of peri- implant diseases with a high level of consensus among experts. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of agreement in certain domains.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171145/1/jper10769.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171145/2/jper10769_am.pd