Evaluating the Performance and Implementation of the 2018 Classification of Periodontal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Survey

Abstract

AimTo evaluate the performance and implementation of the 2018 Classification of Periodontal Diseases for periodontitis through systematic review and survey methodology.Materials and MethodsA two‐part systematic review was conducted. Part 1 aimed, with descriptive statistics, to evaluate performance metrics of the 2018 Classification, including diagnostic accuracy, prognostic performance and examiner reliability. Part 2 used thematic analysis to elucidate facilitators and barriers to the implementation of the classification. A survey collected evidence of barriers, facilitators and local implementation.ResultsPart 1 of this review included 14 individual studies of moderate risk of bias. Eight studies examined diagnostic accuracy, three studies examined prognostic efficacy and three studies examined inter‐/intra‐rater reliability. Part 2 included 33 individual studies with data considered at high risk of bias. The survey returned 1113 responses. The thematic analysis in Part 2 led to seven findings, five related to facilitators and two concerning barriers to the implementation. Survey results showed that 78% of respondents currently use the classification, but the most common concerns relate to its complexity.ConclusionsThe 2018 Classification performs well as a classification in comparison with previous classifications. Specific identified barriers have potentially limited the comprehensive uptake of the classification.