Study Comparing Two Different Methods of Treating Periodontal Disease

NCT ID: NCT00127244

Last Updated: 2010-12-02

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE2

Total Enrollment

400 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2000-06-30

Study Completion Date

2004-10-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purposes of this study are to:

1. compare the clinical effectiveness of a traditional and a medical model of periodontal therapy; and
2. determine the value of the two approaches to periodontal therapy.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This application was developed to test the following hypothesis: A medical model of periodontal therapy, when compared to a traditional model, is as clinically effective, is more valuable, and can be realistically implemented in clinical practice. To accomplish this task a prospective, blinded, community based, cohort trial will be carried out. Two analytical techniques will be employed to compare the outcomes of periodontal therapy: clinical effectiveness and value. The two primary outcome variables for assessing clinical effectiveness will be clinician centered (attachment level) and patient centered (quality of life). The key outcome variable for value determination is cost of care. Value is then determined by dividing the outcome by the cost of care. Thus a similar outcome at reduced cost increases value. This facilitates calculating cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of care, preparing decision analysis trees, and carrying out sensitivity analysis.

There are two significant reasons for testing a medical model of care. If the hypothesis is correct:

1. this would increase access to periodontal care; and
2. it would offer a cost-effective method to treat periodontal infections that are correlated with systemic health problems.

These points argue for a direct comparison of the medical and traditional models of care.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Periodontal Diseases

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Periodontal Treatment

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* \>/= 4 or more periodontally involved teeth as defined by pocket depth of \>/= 6mm.
* \>/= 14 teeth.
* \> 18 years of age.
* Reside in the greater Boston area.

Exclusion Criteria

* Those patients requiring prophylactic antibiotic for dental treatment.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)

NIH

Sponsor Role collaborator

Delta Dental Plan Massachusetts

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role collaborator

Harvard University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

The Forsyth Institute

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Richard Niederman

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

The Forsyth Institute

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

The Forsyth Institute

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

R01DE013850

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: secondary_id

View Link

DE-013850

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: secondary_id

NIDCR-13850

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id