Clinical Oral Investigations

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 1167–1173 | Cite as

Periodontal screening and referral behaviour of general dental practitioners in Flanders

  • E. Meers
  • C. Dekeyser
  • C. Favril
  • W. Teughels
  • M. Quirynen
  • Isabelle Laleman
Original Article



The objective of this study was to investigate the screening and referral behaviour of Flemish dentists concerning periodontitis and more specific, the use of the Dutch Periodontal Screening Index (DPSI).

Materials and methods

An online questionnaire was electronically distributed through the different professional dental societies. It consisted of two parts: the first aimed at describing the profile of the dentist. The second part inquired the screening method, when this was applied, periodontal risk factors and referral behaviour.


One thousand fifty dentists attended to the questionnaire. One hundred fifty-nine questionnaires were excluded since they did not match the target audience. Sixty-four percent of Flemish dentists used DPSI as a periodontal screening method, 28% screened based on probing pocket depth, 4% used solely radiographs and 4% had no screening method at all. The usage of DPSI is influenced by the year of graduation: the longer the dentists were graduated, the less they used DPSI. No influence of sex, education centre and location was found. Referral behaviour is influenced by different patient- and dentist-related factors.


Regarding the screening behaviour, there seems a consensus among Flemish dentists that a periodontal probe should be used. For referral, there is no consensus about if and when to refer to a specialist.

Clinical relevance

It is encouraging that 92% of the Flemish general dental practitioners use a probe when screening for periodontitis. However, DPSI is mainly used by younger dentists. An effort should be made to encourage all dentists to use this, so that in every patient, periodontitis can be detected timely, securing the best treatment outcome.


Periodontitis Screening Referral behaviour Dutch periodontal screening index (DPSI) 



We gratefully acknowledge the ‘Leuvense Universitaire Tandheelkunde Vereniging’ (LUTV), ‘Koninklijke Limburgse Tandartsen Vereniging’ (KLTV), ‘Verbond der Vlaamse Tandartsen’ (VVT) and ‘Vlaamse Beroepsvereniging Tandartsen’ (VBT) for their help with distributing the questionnaire. For the statistical analysis, we thank Steven De Peuter.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Supplementary material

784_2017_2212_MOESM1_ESM.docx (14 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 13 kb)


  1. 1.
    Kassebaum NJ, Bernabé E, Dahiya M et al (2014) Global burden of severe periodontitis in 1990-2010: a systematic review and meta-regression. J Dent Res 93:1045–1053. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frencken JE, Sharma P, Stenhouse L et al (2017) Global epidemiology of dental caries and severe periodontitis—a comprehensive review. J Clin Periodontol 44(Suppl 18):S94–S105. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ziebolz D, Szabadi I, Rinke S et al (2011) Initial periodontal screening and radiographic findings—a comparison of two methods to evaluate the periodontal situation. BMC Oral Health 11:3. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cobb CM, Carrara A, El-Annan E et al (2003) Periodontal referral patterns, 1980 versus 2000: a preliminary study. J Periodontol 74:1470–1474. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van der Velden U (2009) The Dutch periodontal screening index validation and its application in The Netherlands. J Clin Periodontol 36:1018–1024. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garcia RI, Compton R, Dietrich T (2016) Risk assessment and periodontal prevention in primary care. Periodontol 2000 71:10–21. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glicksman MA (2001) Referral of the periodontal patient to the periodontist. Periodontol 2000 25:110–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghiabi E, Weerasinghe S (2011) The periodontal examination profile of general dentists in Nova Scotia, Canada. J Periodontol 82:33–40. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Corbet EF (1998) Practical periodontal screening and diagnosis. Int Dent J 48:268–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee JH, Bennett DE, Richards PS, Inglehart MR (2009) Periodontal referral patterns of general dentists: lessons for dental education. J Dent Educ 73:199–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McGuire MK, Scheyer ET (2003) A referral-based periodontal practice—yesterday, today, and tomorrow. J Periodontol 74:1542–1544. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ainamo J, Barmes D, Beagrie G et al (1982) Development of the World Health Organization (WHO) community periodontal index of treatment needs (CPITN). Int Dent J 32:281–291PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    (1993) Periodontal screening & recording an early detection system. J N J Dent Assoc Spring; 64(2):7–9, 11Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    British Society of Periodontology (2001) Periodontology in general dental practice. A policy statement.
  15. 15.
    van der Velden U (2005) Purpose and problems of periodontal disease classification. Periodontol 2000 39:13–21. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Veerle Vivet, Pieter-Jan Miermans (2015) Algemene tandartsen op de arbeidsmarkt, 2012 - Resultaten van de PlanCAD Gegevenskoppeling FOD VVVL - Datawarehouse AM&SB - RIZIVGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Linden GJ, Stevenson M, Burke FJ (1999) Variation in periodontal referral in 2 regions in the UK. J Clin Periodontol 26:590–595CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tugnait A, Clerehugh V, Hirschmann PN (2004) Use of the basic periodontal examination and radiographs in the assessment of periodontal diseases in general dental practice. J Dent 32:17–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Darby IB, Angkasa F, Duong C et al (2005) Factors influencing the diagnosis and treatment of periodontal disease by dental practitioners in Victoria. Aust Dent J 50:37–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ghiabi E, Taylor KL (2010) Teaching methods and surgical training in North American graduate periodontics programs: exploring the landscape. J Dent Educ 74:618–627PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Akesson L, Håkansson J, Rohlin M (1992) Comparison of panoramic and intraoral radiography and pocket probing for the measurement of the marginal bone level. J Clin Periodontol 19:326–332CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim T-S, Obst C, Zehaczek S, Geenen C (2008) Detection of bone loss with different X-ray techniques in periodontal patients. J Periodontol 79:1141–1149. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ercan E, Uysal C, Uzun C, Yılmaz M (2015) Periodontal examination profiles and treatment approaches of a group of Turkish general dentists. Oral Health Prev Dent 13:275–280. PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section of Periodontology, Department of Oral Health Sciences, KU Leuven and DentistryUniversity Hospitals LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations