Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 
 

Files

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

Periodontal Practice Patterns

Yu, Janel K.

Abstract Details

2010, Master of Science, Ohio State University, Dentistry.
Background: Differences in the rates of dental services between geographic regions are important since major discrepancies in practice patterns may suggest an absence of evidence-based clinical information leading to numerous treatment plans for similar dental problems and the misallocation of limited resources. Variations in dental care to patients may result from characteristics of the periodontist. Insurance claims data in this study were compared to the characteristics of periodontal providers to determine if variations in practice patterns exist. Methods: Claims data, between 2000-2009 from Delta Dental of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, New Mexico, and Tennessee, were examined to analyze the practice patterns of 351 periodontists. For each provider, the average number of select CDT periodontal codes (4000-4999), implants (6010), and extractions (7140) were calculated over two time periods in relation to provider variable, including state, urban versus rural area, gender, experience, location of training, and membership in organized dentistry. Descriptive statistics were performed to depict the data using measures of central tendency and measures of dispersion. Results: Differences in periodontal procedures were present across states. Although the most common surgical procedure in the study period was osseous surgery, greater increases over time were observed in regenerative procedures (bone grafts, biologics, GTR) when compared to osseous surgery. There was also a 1.7 and 2.5 fold increase in implants and extractions, respectively. In the past five years, the greatest difference in total number of periodontal procedure codes (CDT codes 4000-4999) per provider between: a) states were 414%; b) urban and rural areas were 4%; c) educational backgrounds of providers were 189%; d) most and least experienced providers were 42%; e) men and women were 49%; and f) those who were and were not in organized dentistry were 62%. Furthermore, between many of the specific CDT codes, differences were observed when the characteristics of periodontal providers were considered. Conclusions: There has been an evolution in treatment patterns that is dependent upon where periodontists work as well as their experience, educational background, gender, and participation in organized dentistry. If disease patterns are similar in patient populations, these data suggest that external influences may have a substantial impact on the treatment rendered to patients. Furthermore, if these practice patterns hold true in larger populations, it underscores the need for evidence-based practice guidelines and research to reduce variations in periodontal care and in so doing improve patient management.
Angelo Mariotti, DDS (Advisor)
Jed Jacobson, DDS (Committee Member)
Eric Seiber, PhD (Committee Member)
181 p.

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Yu, J. K. (2010). Periodontal Practice Patterns [Master's thesis, Ohio State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1273587161

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Yu, Janel. Periodontal Practice Patterns. 2010. Ohio State University, Master's thesis. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1273587161.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Yu, Janel. "Periodontal Practice Patterns." Master's thesis, Ohio State University, 2010. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1273587161

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)