Department of Periodontology, Universitat Internacional de Cataluña, Barcelona.
ETEP (Etiology and Therapy of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases) Research Group, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
J Clin Periodontol. 2022 Aug;49(8):732-739. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13618. Epub 2022 Jun 22.
To evaluate the inter-examiner reliability in classifying periodontitis using the 2018 classification of periodontal diseases, when used by postgraduate students, academics, and specialist clinicians trained in European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) and American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) postgraduate-accredited programmes.
An online survey including five patients with periodontitis was sent twice to seven specialists in periodontology to provide the staging and grading characteristics. After agreeing on a "gold-standard" classification, the same questionnaire was sent to 16 EFP and 73 AAP postgraduate programmes, to be answered by their faculty, graduates, and students. The responses were compared with the gold-standard classification, and the inter-examiner agreement was calculated.
One-hundred and seventy-four participants completed the survey. The inter-examiner agreement resulted in 68.7% in assigning the stage, 82.4% in assigning the grade, and 75.5% in assigning the extent. The academic position and the experience of the participants did not have any significant influence on classifying periodontitis as the gold standard.
The use of the 2018 periodontitis classification resulted in high inter-examiner reliability when used by a specialist group of clinicians, postgraduate students, and academicians, irrespective of their current position and experience. Given the low response rate and potential selection bias, results pertaining to the use of this system in classifying periodontitis should be interpreted with caution.
评估 2018 年牙周病分类法在研究生、学术人员和接受过欧洲牙周病学会（EFP）和美国牙周病学会（AAP）研究生认证课程培训的专科临床医生使用时，对牙周炎进行分类的检查者间可靠性。
通过在线调查向七名牙周病专科医生发送了包括五名牙周炎患者的信息，要求他们提供分期和分级特征。在达成“金标准”分类后，将相同的问卷发送给 16 个 EFP 和 73 个 AAP 研究生课程，由其教师、毕业生和学生回答。将这些回答与金标准分类进行比较，并计算检查者间的一致性。
共有 174 名参与者完成了调查。分期的检查者间一致性为 68.7%，分级为 82.4%，分期为 75.5%。参与者的学术地位和经验对分类牙周炎作为金标准没有任何显著影响。
使用 2018 年牙周炎分类法时，无论其当前职位和经验如何，专业临床医生、研究生和学者组成的专家组使用该分类法可获得较高的检查者间可靠性。鉴于低应答率和潜在的选择偏倚，应谨慎解释关于该系统在牙周炎分类中的使用结果。
