Conceição Sarah Dos Santos, Batista Josicélia Estrela Tuy, Cruz Simone Seixas da, Gomes-Filho Isaac Suzart, Hintz Alexandre Marcelo, Coelho Julita Maria Freitas, Passos-Soares Johelle de Santana, Loomer Peter Michael, Lyrio Amanda Oliveira, Souza Elivan Silva, Figueiredo Ana Cláudia Morais Godoy, Pereira Mauricio Gomes
Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brazil.
Department of Health, Feira de Santana State University, Feira de Santana, Bahia, Brazil.
PLoS One. 2024 Jul 17;19(7):e0304758. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304758. eCollection 2024.
The diversity of criteria used in the diagnosis of periodontitis in pregnant women makes it difficult to define and compare the disease. Using a systematic review, this study evaluated the accuracy of criteria for diagnosing periodontitis in pregnant women. Searches were carried out in the databases: Medline/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, Lilacs, ProQuest, and CINAHL. Validation studies of the criteria used for diagnosing periodontitis met the inclusion criteria. The study steps were performed by three independent reviewers. A qualitative synthesis of the included articles was carried out and the quality methodological analysis using the QUADAS-2 instrument. The assessment of the quality of the evidence was obtained through the GRADE tool. A total of 592 records were identified, of which only 6 made up this systematic review. The included studies analyzed different criteria for diagnosing periodontitis, evaluating 3,005 pregnant women. The criteria selected as a test presented results equivalent to the performance of those recognized as the gold standard. The self-reported criteria were of lower diagnostic accuracy. A major limitation of this review was the small number of primary studies that evaluated clinical diagnosis of periodontitis in pregnant women, which was highly heterogeneous, making it impossible to carry out accuracy meta-analysis and additional analyzes. There is a lack of consensus on the criteria for the diagnosis of periodontitis, with great variability in the accuracy and prevalence of the disease in pregnant women.
用于诊断孕妇牙周炎的标准存在多样性，这使得对该疾病的定义和比较变得困难。本研究通过系统评价评估了诊断孕妇牙周炎标准的准确性。在以下数据库中进行了检索：Medline/PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Web of Science、SciELO、Lilacs、ProQuest和CINAHL。符合纳入标准的是用于诊断牙周炎的标准的验证研究。研究步骤由三位独立的评审员执行。对纳入的文章进行了定性综合，并使用QUADAS - 2工具进行了质量方法分析。通过GRADE工具获得证据质量的评估。总共识别出592条记录，其中只有6条构成了本系统评价。纳入的研究分析了诊断牙周炎的不同标准，评估了3005名孕妇。选为测试的标准呈现出与被视为金标准的标准性能相当的结果。自我报告的标准诊断准确性较低。本综述的一个主要局限性是评估孕妇牙周炎临床诊断的原始研究数量较少，这些研究高度异质性，使得无法进行准确性荟萃分析和其他分析。关于牙周炎的诊断标准缺乏共识，该疾病在孕妇中的准确性和患病率差异很大。
