SPT performed by non-specialist clinicians (general dental practitioners under specialist prescription) vs SPT performed by specialists (specialist practice): Probing pocket depth
- Population
- Adults treated for periodontitis and receiving supportive periodontal therapy (SPT)
- Intervention
- SPT performed by non-specialist clinicians (general dental practitioners under specialist prescription)
- Comparison
- SPT performed by specialists (specialist practice)
- Outcome
- Probing pocket depth
It is very uncertain whether SPT performed by non-specialist clinicians (general dental… changes probing pocket depth (mm) compared with SPT performed by specialists (specialist practice) (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
SPT performed by non-specialist clinicians (general dental practitioners under specialist prescription) vs SPT performed by specialists (specialist practice) Probing pocket depth (mm) · Adults treated for periodontitis and receiving supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) · 12 months It is very uncertain whether SPT performed by non-specialist clinicians (general dental… changes probing pocket depth (mm) compared with SPT performed by specialists (specialist practice) (very low certainty). Supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) for maintaining the dentition in adults treated for periodontitis (2018) · Cochrane All outcomes | MD 0.20 [-0.40, 0.80] | 1 study · 35 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) for maintaining the dentition in adults treated for periodontitis 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2017-05 | Not listed | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.