1. Repositório Institucional da UFMG
  2. Publicações Científicas e Culturais
  3. Artigo de Periódico
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/69592
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.creatorClaúdio Mendes Pannutipt_BR
dc.creatorFernando de Oliveira Costapt_BR
dc.creatorNathalia Vilela Souzapt_BR
dc.creatorBelen Retamal-Valdespt_BR
dc.creatorAmanda Almeida Costapt_BR
dc.creatorCristiano Susinpt_BR
dc.creatorMagda Ferespt_BR
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-02T17:34:33Z-
dc.date.available2024-07-02T17:34:33Z-
dc.date.issued2021-09-24-
dc.citation.volume35pt_BR
dc.citation.issueSuppl 2pt_BR
dc.citation.spage1pt_BR
dc.citation.epage9pt_BR
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2021.vol35.0100pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn1807-3107pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1843/69592-
dc.description.resumoRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) are human studies carried out to compare different treatments or interventions, and their results are used to support clinical decision-making and improve patient care. Herein, the aim of this study was to review the selection process of study outcomes in periodontology. Primary outcomes should draw the main conclusions of the study, whereas secondary outcomes should only be used to help explain the main findings and generate future research hypothesis. Outcomes are classified as clinically relevant (CROs) or surrogate outcomes. CROs – the first option for primary outcome variables - should convey not only substantial health benefits, but also be deemed important by patients. In periodontology, tooth loss/retention and oral health–related quality of life (OHRQoL) are examples of CROs. While tooth loss has main limitations as a primary outcome, emerging evidence suggest that patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can accurately detect OHRQoL following periodontal therapy. When CROs cannot be assessed, validated surrogate outcomes can be used as proxies. Primary outcome variables should reflect a treatment endpoint at the patient level that can be easily used to inform decision-making in daily practice. These outcomes should allow the implementation of a treat-to-target concept in which the intervention can be clearly judged against a prespecified treatment target. Recently, the presence of at most 4 sites with periodontal probing depth ≥5 mm post-treatment was suggested as an effective endpoint for periodontal trials. In perspective, a combination of validated clinical parameters and PROMs will provide a more comprehensive assessment of periodontal treatments.pt_BR
dc.languageengpt_BR
dc.publisherUniversidade Federal de Minas Geraispt_BR
dc.publisher.countryBrasilpt_BR
dc.publisher.departmentFAO - DEPARTAMENTO DE CLÍNICApt_BR
dc.publisher.initialsUFMGpt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofBrazilian Oral Researchpt_BR
dc.rightsAcesso Abertopt_BR
dc.subjectClinical trialspt_BR
dc.subjectperiodontologypt_BR
dc.subjectperiodontal outcomespt_BR
dc.subject.otherTreatment outcomept_BR
dc.subject.otherPeriodonticspt_BR
dc.subject.otherRandomized controlled trialpt_BR
dc.titleRandomized clinical trials in periodontology: focus on outcomes selectionpt_BR
dc.typeArtigo de Periódicopt_BR
dc.url.externahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bor/a/Q8BYsndhvc5h5Gdnm99yKvC/?lang=enpt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4181-3975pt_BR
Appears in Collections:Artigo de Periódico

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Randomized clinical trials in periodontology focus on outcomes selection.pdf257.6 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.