TY - JOUR
T1 - Diagnostic reproducibility of the 2018 Classification of Gingival Recession Defects and Gingival Phenotype
T2 - A multicenter inter- and intra-examiner agreement study
AU - Pini Prato, Giovanpaolo
AU - Di Gianfilippo, Riccardo
AU - Pannuti, Claudio M.
AU - Allen, Edward P.
AU - Aroca, Sofia
AU - Avila-Ortiz, Gustavo
AU - Bouchard, Philippe
AU - Cairo, Francesco
AU - Chackartchi, Tali
AU - Cortellini, Pierpaolo
AU - Franceschi, Debora
AU - Mahajan, Ajay
AU - Mancini, Evelyn A.
AU - McGuire, Michael K.
AU - Natsvlishvili, Tea
AU - Santamaria, Mauro P.
AU - Scheyer, E. Todd
AU - Wang, Hom Lay
AU - Kornman, Kenneth
AU - Chambrone, Leandro
N1 - © 2022 American Academy of Periodontology.
PY - 2023/5
Y1 - 2023/5
N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the inter- and intra-examiner agreement among international experts on the diagnosis of gingival recession defects using the 2018 Classification of Gingival Recession Defects and Gingival Phenotype as proposed in the 2017 World Workshop. Methods: Standardized intraoral photographs from 28 gingival recession defects were evaluated twice by 16 expert periodontists. Recession type (RT), recession depth (RD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), gingival thickness (GT), detectability of the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), and presence of root steps (RS) were recorded and used for the analysis. Intra- and inter-examiner agreements were calculated for individual variables and for the overall classification. Intraclass correlation coefficient with 95% CI was used for RD and KTW; Kappa with 95% CI was used for GT, CEJ, and RS; quadratic weighted Kappa with 95% CI was used for RT. Results: Overall intra- and inter-examiner agreements were highest for KTW (0.95 and 0.90), lowest for GT (0.75 and 0.41), with the other variables in between (RD: 0.93 and 0.68, RS: 0.87 and 0.65, RT: 0.79 and 0.64, CEJ: 0.75 and 0.57). Overall intra- and inter-examiner agreements for the matrix were 62% and 28%, respectively. Significant effects existed between one variable's measurement and other variables’ agreements. Conclusions: The 2018 Classification of Gingival Recession Defects and Gingival Phenotype is clinically reproducible within the examiners, and when the variables forming the matrix are analyzed individually. The between-examiner agreement for the complete matrix showed lower reproducibility. The agreement was highest for KTW and RD, and least for GT.
AB - Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the inter- and intra-examiner agreement among international experts on the diagnosis of gingival recession defects using the 2018 Classification of Gingival Recession Defects and Gingival Phenotype as proposed in the 2017 World Workshop. Methods: Standardized intraoral photographs from 28 gingival recession defects were evaluated twice by 16 expert periodontists. Recession type (RT), recession depth (RD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), gingival thickness (GT), detectability of the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), and presence of root steps (RS) were recorded and used for the analysis. Intra- and inter-examiner agreements were calculated for individual variables and for the overall classification. Intraclass correlation coefficient with 95% CI was used for RD and KTW; Kappa with 95% CI was used for GT, CEJ, and RS; quadratic weighted Kappa with 95% CI was used for RT. Results: Overall intra- and inter-examiner agreements were highest for KTW (0.95 and 0.90), lowest for GT (0.75 and 0.41), with the other variables in between (RD: 0.93 and 0.68, RS: 0.87 and 0.65, RT: 0.79 and 0.64, CEJ: 0.75 and 0.57). Overall intra- and inter-examiner agreements for the matrix were 62% and 28%, respectively. Significant effects existed between one variable's measurement and other variables’ agreements. Conclusions: The 2018 Classification of Gingival Recession Defects and Gingival Phenotype is clinically reproducible within the examiners, and when the variables forming the matrix are analyzed individually. The between-examiner agreement for the complete matrix showed lower reproducibility. The agreement was highest for KTW and RD, and least for GT.
KW - classification
KW - connective tissue
KW - gingiva
KW - gingival recession
KW - periodontics
KW - phenotype
KW - tooth root
KW - Reproducibility of Results
KW - Humans
KW - Tooth Root
KW - Treatment Outcome
KW - Phenotype
KW - Gingiva
KW - Connective Tissue
KW - Gingival Recession
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144401754&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/JPER.22-0501
DO - 10.1002/JPER.22-0501
M3 - Article
C2 - 36464773
AN - SCOPUS:85144401754
SN - 0022-3492
VL - 94
SP - 661
EP - 672
JO - Journal of Periodontology
JF - Journal of Periodontology
IS - 5
ER -