BACKGROUND: Our objectives were to describe the prevalence of periodontal care (a marker of periodontitis) among persons with and without diabetes and to examine the association between periodontal care and diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis, using 5 years of electronic data from a population-based cohort (N = 46,132), aged 40 to 70 years, with dental and medical insurance, and ≥ 1 dental and ≥ 1 medical visit. Periodontal care (yes/no) was defined by dental claims codes for procedures used to manage periodontitis. The association between periodontal care and diabetes was determined using logistic regression adjusted for and stratified by age, sex, insurance type, smoking status, body mass index (BMI) (in kilograms per square meter), and resource utilization band (RUB) (a measure of expected health care utilization attributable to comorbidity). RESULTS: Overall, 11.2% (5,153 of 46,132) met diabetes criteria. The age-adjusted prevalence of periodontal care among those with and without diabetes was 39.1% and 32.5%, respectively (P <0.0001). The association between diabetes and periodontal care decreased with increasing age (interaction, P <0.0001), adjusting for BMI and RUB. The aged-stratified, adjusted odds ratio (OR) for periodontal care associated with diabetes was highest among those aged 40 to 44 years [OR, 1.6; confidence interval (CI), 1.30 to 1.97] and lowest among those aged 60 to 64 years (OR, 0.97; CI, 0.81 to 1.15) and was significant only among those aged 40 to 54 years. CONCLUSION: We found that the prevalence of periodontal care was significantly higher among those with diabetes compared to those without diabetes and that the magnitude of this association decreased with increasing age.
BACKGROUND: Our objectives were to describe the prevalence of periodontal care (a marker of periodontitis) among persons with and without diabetes and to examine the association between periodontal care and diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis, using 5 years of electronic data from a population-based cohort (N = 46,132), aged 40 to 70 years, with dental and medical insurance, and ≥ 1 dental and ≥ 1 medical visit. Periodontal care (yes/no) was defined by dental claims codes for procedures used to manage periodontitis. The association between periodontal care and diabetes was determined using logistic regression adjusted for and stratified by age, sex, insurance type, smoking status, body mass index (BMI) (in kilograms per square meter), and resource utilization band (RUB) (a measure of expected health care utilization attributable to comorbidity). RESULTS: Overall, 11.2% (5,153 of 46,132) met diabetes criteria. The age-adjusted prevalence of periodontal care among those with and without diabetes was 39.1% and 32.5%, respectively (P <0.0001). The association between diabetes and periodontal care decreased with increasing age (interaction, P <0.0001), adjusting for BMI and RUB. The aged-stratified, adjusted odds ratio (OR) for periodontal care associated with diabetes was highest among those aged 40 to 44 years [OR, 1.6; confidence interval (CI), 1.30 to 1.97] and lowest among those aged 60 to 64 years (OR, 0.97; CI, 0.81 to 1.15) and was significant only among those aged 40 to 54 years. CONCLUSION: We found that the prevalence of periodontal care was significantly higher among those with diabetes compared to those without diabetes and that the magnitude of this association decreased with increasing age.
Authors: Monica Chaudhari; Rebecca Hubbard; Robert J Reid; Ronald Inge; Katherine M Newton; Leslie Spangler; William E Barlow Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2012-07-09 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: Isabel Jimenez-Trujillo; Rodrigo Jiménez-García; Jesus Esteban-Hernández; Valentin Hernández-Barrera; Pilar Carrasco Garrido; Miguel A Salinero-Fort; Juan Cardenas-Valladolid; Ana López-de-Andrés Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-06-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Fabienne A Gerber; Philipp Sahrmann; Oliver A Schmidlin; Christian Heumann; Jürg Hans Beer; Patrick R Schmidlin Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 2.757