Preventive programmes in adults

From a practical point of view, it is more important to prevent the progression of periodontal disease, which is widespread in adults than to cancel gingivitis. However, as gingivitis or precedes or accompanies destructive periodontal disease and dental plaque is the etiological agent, the measures in effect reduce gingivitis in children, are relevant also for adults. On the other hand, adults, subgingival dental plaque and supragingival deposits of plaque and Tartar are common, so professional tooth-cleaning may include an element of subgingival tools for the treatment of early destructive defeat.

The success of preventive treatment regimen depends on the extent to which it will save attachments levels. In children, loss of investment occurs rarely and consequences of plaque accumulation must be measured mainly its impact on the gingivae. Preventive schemes in adults, however, can be estimated by comparing changes to the application level with the untreated control values.

The paramount importance of training in oral hygiene in the prevention of periodontitis was demonstrated in the 1970's, when it was shown that, when grinding and polishing is not supported training in oral hygiene, then gingivitis and progressive loss of investment occurs, regardless of whether the procedure is repeated every year, 6-month, or 3 months (Suomi et al.

1973a).

The need for scalability obviously will depend to a large extent on a course of mathematical analysis of formation and the presence of pathological pockets, which harbour subgingival deposits of plaque and Tartar. When pockets of less than 3 mm in depth, therefore, gingivitis can be significantly reduced by training oral hygiene alone, even with the abundance of supragingival calculus is present. Pockets of 4-5 mm, on the other hand, will not respond to training in oral hygiene before until subgingival processing was performed, and as soon as pocket at depths exceeding 5 mm, of adequate non-surgical treatment is much less predictable.

Effect of prophylactic regime, not only on the gums health, but also on investment levels, said a 3-Year, the classic study (Suomi et al. 1971a,b, Suomi et al. 1973b), in which the test group was provided dental education, training oral hygiene and professional tooth-cleaning 2-4 months intervals. Control subjects who were not taken preventive programme had significantly higher plaque scores more gingivitis, and their rate of loss of investment, to 0.1 mm/year, was more than 31/2 times more than their experienced colleagues. In addition, during the 3-year trial period, in the experimental group showed that almost no x-ray data, loss of bone mass in the region-the lower right of the rear segment-taking into account that the management of the exposed 0.19 mm ultimate destruction of the bones. Two and a half years after the experiment was terminated and preventive scheme disbanded, the former experimental group continued to show teeth cleaner and better periodontal health than the former control group. However, the difference between the groups with respect to hygiene of the mouth and gums, has faded.

Another, similar to the 3 years of the study included the investigation of the growth of cavities (Axelsson and Christina 1978). Experimental group 375 adults received instructions on oral hygiene and cleaning and root planing in the beginning of the study. These measures were repeated as necessary on 2-month intervals in the first 2 years, and 3-month intervals during the third year. A total of 180 controls received only traditional dental care at yearly intervals, and during this period, showed persistent gingivitis and progressive loss of periodontal attachment. The experimental group showed slight signs of gingivitis and without loss of periodontal support. ..