Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Users Online: 2341
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 2061-2066  

The influence of tobacco consumption on periodontal health: A stratified analysis based on type of tobacco use


1 Department of Orthodontics, KIMS Dental College, Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, KIMS Dental College, Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh, India
3 Department of Prosthodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India
4 Department of Periodontology, GSL Dental College and Hospital, Rajahmundry, Andhra Pradesh, India
5 Department of Prosthodontics, GSL Dental College and Hospital, Rajahmundry, Andhra Pradesh, India
6 Department of Orthodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India
7 Department of Public Health Dentistry, SIBAR Institute of Dental Sciences, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India

Date of Submission28-Nov-2019
Date of Decision05-Dec-2019
Date of Acceptance06-Jan-2020
Date of Web Publication30-Apr-2020

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Anusha Yaragani
Department of Orthodontics, KIMS Dental College, Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1071_19

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Introduction: Though the negative influence of tobacco consumption on the periodontal status of an individual is established, the magnitude of this association based on the type of tobacco used is seldom investigated. Aim: The aim of this study is to check the differences in the periodontal status of individuals based on their current tobacco consumption status and type of tobacco consumption. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted among subjects attending a teaching dental institution in Andhra Pradesh. Subjects were divided into three groups based on their current tobacco consumption status. The following parameters were recorded after examination by two calibrated investigators: number of sites with bleeding on probing; number of teeth with periodontal pockets; number of teeth with clinical attachment loss of ≥5 mm; number of teeth lost. SPSS version 20 software was used to analyze the data. Results: While current users demonstrated poor periodontal status than the former and nonusers, there was a significant difference in periodontal health between former users and nonusers in all the study parameters except the mean number of teeth lost. Among current users, the mean percentage of sites with bleeding and attachment loss >5 mm were found to be least among smokers compared to tobacco chewers and those who consume both smoke and smokeless forms of tobacco. Conclusion: The study confirms the negative influence of tobacco consumption on periodontal health and also establishes the increased destruction of clinical attachment levels among tobacco chewers compared to smokers.

Keywords: Periodontal attachment loss, smokeless tobacco, tobacco use


How to cite this article:
Yaragani A, Sushuma K V, Guduri V, Thirumalasetty S S, Vishnubhotla G, Kandikatla P, Chandu VC. The influence of tobacco consumption on periodontal health: A stratified analysis based on type of tobacco use. J Family Med Prim Care 2020;9:2061-6

How to cite this URL:
Yaragani A, Sushuma K V, Guduri V, Thirumalasetty S S, Vishnubhotla G, Kandikatla P, Chandu VC. The influence of tobacco consumption on periodontal health: A stratified analysis based on type of tobacco use. J Family Med Prim Care [serial online] 2020 [cited 2021 Feb 26];9:2061-6. Available from: https://www.jfmpc.com/text.asp?2020/9/4/2061/283383




  Introduction Top


Though the tobacco consumption habits among the Indian population have been reported to be decreasing, statistics relating to the prevalence of tobacco use confirm that more than one-quarter of the nation's populace still consume tobacco in one form or the other. Khaini and Beedi are among the most commonly used smokeless and smoke forms of tobacco used in India, respectively. Clear gender variations are seen in the adoption of this deleterious habit, with 42.4% of men and 14.2% of women reporting the use of tobacco. There are statewide variations in the prevalence of tobacco consumption with Andhra Pradesh (20%) demonstrating considerably lesser prevalence compared to the national average (28.6%).[1] It is an established fact that the incidence of tobacco use is higher among people belonging to lower socioeconomic strata and a cyclical relationship has been reported between tobacco consumption by poorer sections and further deterioration of their socioeconomic status owing to the negative health-related consequences of tobacco use which include coronary artery disease, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, peptic ulcer, lung, oral cavity, and gastrointestinal tract cancers.[2],[3] Periodontal diseases refer to the disintegration of connective tissue that anchors the tooth and could result in tooth mortality. Poor periodontal health is one of the many adverse health consequences of tobacco use which did not receive enough emphasis, especially in light of the significant negative effect of periodontal diseases on the quality of life of the affected.[4] It is this increased incidence of periodontal diseases among tobacco users that offers an opportunity for the oral health care professionals to inquire about the tobacco consumption habits of their patients, discuss with them the deleterious effects of tobacco, and motivate them towards quitting the habit.[5]

Despite the high self-reported rate of attempting to quit the habit, the majority of people, who attempt quitting, resume using tobacco due to a variety of reasons.[6] The poor supporting environment is one of the major reasons which preclude an individual from quitting the habit of tobacco use. Previous studies highlighted the socioeconomic inequalities in the success of quit attempts, with people belonging to poorer socioeconomic strata being less successful.[7] Considering the fact that oral health care services at dental institutions are more commonly utilized by economically disadvantaged sections and the inextricable association between tobacco use and negative oral health outcomes. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India in collaboration with various stakeholders including Dental Council of India published a book "Establishment of Tobacco Cessation Centers in Dental Institutes—An Integrated Approach in India—Operational Guidelines 2018."[8] All the dental institutions in the country have been directed to establish tobacco cessation clinics following the aforementioned directives, and it was noted by the council that 12 dental institutions have not established tobacco cessation centers as directed, as on 27th of September, 2019.[9] In this context, it becomes important to just not to assess the association between tobacco use and periodontal disease but to establish the magnitude of influence of tobacco on periodontal status of an individual based on the type of use to better get informed and motivate the subjects with tobacco consumption habit towards quitting.


  Materials and Methods Top


This cross-sectional study was conducted among subjects attending the outpatient department of a teaching dental institution in coastal Andhra Pradesh. The teaching dental institution serves a huge demographic and people from different socioeconomic strata. The study protocol was approved by the institutional ethical committee (2_IEC-KIMS-19) and informed consent was obtained from all the study participants before the clinical examination. The sample size was determined to be 98 in each group using G*power 3.1.9.2 software and 100 subjects were included in each of the three study groups. The three study groups are as follows: current tobacco users who reported use of 100 cigarettes or other smoking forms of tobacco in their lifetime and are currently smoking every day or some days and/or chewing tobacco products at least 20 times in their life and are currently chewing tobacco products every day or some days; former tobacco users who reported use of 100 cigarettes or other smoking forms of tobacco in their lifetime and had quit smoking at the time of the study and/or chewing tobacco products at least 20 times in their life and had quit chewing tobacco products at the time of the study; and nonusers who had never smoked or chewed tobacco products in their life or who reported use of less than 100 cigarettes or other smoking forms of tobacco and less than 20 times use of chewing tobacco products.[10],[11] The intention of the investigators was to recruit current users first and then identify the age and gender-matched subjects in the former user and nonuser groups. However, since none of the subjects in the current user group were females, there was no question of gender matching and subjects were only matched on their age. The study was conducted from February 2019 to July 2019. All the subjects underwent an interview seeking information about oral hygiene practices, systemic health, followed by a clinical examination to record the following parameters: number of sites with bleeding on probing; number of teeth with periodontal pockets; number of teeth with clinical attachment loss of ≥5 mm; number of teeth lost. Two investigators participated in the data collection process. The intraclass correlation coefficient values for the two examiners ranged from 0.89 to 0.94 for various parameters demonstrating a good interexaminer reliability. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 software (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows version 20, Armonk, NY, USA). One way analysis of variance with Tukey's post-hoc tests and Chi-square test were used to analyze the data.


  Results Top


The mean age of the study participants was 52.13 years with a standard deviation of 10.82. Current users were observed to be older compared to former users and nonusers. There was a significant difference in the recorded clinical parameters between the three study groups [Table 1]. While current users demonstrated poor periodontal status than the former and nonusers, there was a significant difference in periodontal health between former users and nonusers in all the study parameters except the mean number of teeth lost. Gingival recession was documented to be more common among current users. Pairwise comparisons revealed significant differences among all possible pairs in the clinical parameters considered with current users having poor periodontal status than former users and nonusers [Table 2]. The only exception was the lack of difference in the mean number of teeth lost between former users and nonusers. When the current users were stratified based on the type of tobacco use, a significant difference was observed between these groups with regard to the mean percentage of sites with a bleeding, mean number of teeth with periodontal pockets, and the mean number of teeth with attachment loss greater than 5 mm. There was no significant difference in the number of teeth lost based on the type of tobacco use [Table 3]. Multiple pairwise comparisons revealed that tobacco chewers had a higher mean percentage of bleeding sites compared to smokers and those who reported using both smoking and smokeless tobacco forms. Participants who reported the use of both smoking and smokeless forms of tobacco were observed to be having more attachment loss compared to exclusive chewers and smokers [Table 4]. Graphical representation of the differences in clinical parameters between current and former tobacco users, non users was provided in [Figure 1]. [Figure 2] shows the differences in clinical parameters among current tobacco users based on the type of tobacco use.
Table 1: Comparison of clinical parameters between the three study groups

Click here to view
Table 2: Multiple pairwise comparisons of the clinical parameters between the study groups

Click here to view
Table 3: Comparison of clinical parameters among current users based on the type of use

Click here to view
Table 4: Multiple pairwise comparisons of the clinical parameters among current users based on the type of use

Click here to view
Figure 1: Bar chart showing the differences in clinical parameters between the study groups

Click here to view
Figure 2: Bar chart showing differences in clinical parameters based on the nature of tobacco use

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


In light of the established association between periodontal status and the systemic health of an individual, it is understood that tobacco consumption deteriorates systemic health both directly and in an indirect manner, with poor periodontal status assuming a mediating role. Primary care physicians and oral health care professionals play a key role in advising and supporting the subjects in the process of quitting tobacco. Also, oral health is increasingly being emphasized as an essential component of primary care.[12] Often oral health care facilities serve as the primary contact points for people in the diagnosis of chronic conditions and in engaging the subjects to seek requisite medical care.[13] Literature suggests that dentists administering an efficient tobacco cessation program could achieve a 10–15% quit rate in a year.[14] In this context, oral health care professionals are expected to play a key role in improving the health status of the communities they are serving in, by proactively involving in tobacco cessation counseling.[15]

It is unfortunate that the habit of tobacco consumption is on the rise in developing nations.[16] The acquisition of tobacco chewing habits in different forms is more alarming. In the present study, it was found that 82% of the current tobacco users have tobacco chewing habits, while 49% reported using smoking forms of tobacco. These numbers are in accordance with the Global Adult Tobacco Survey 2016–17 data.[1] The reasons for increasing the use of smokeless forms of tobacco are the relatively cheaper cost of these products and less revealing the nature of their use compared to smoking.[16] The study results reinforce the negative influence of tobacco use on periodontal status. Though there are numerous studies evaluating the impact of tobacco use on the periodontal health of an individual, this is one of the first studies which attempted to comprehensively document periodontal status by considering different clinical parameters. It was identified in the present study that current users have a significantly higher percentage of sites with bleeding compared to former users and nonusers. Among current users, exclusive smokers had the least incidence of gingival bleeding. These results are in compliance with those reported by Gautam et al.[17] and Feldman et al.[18] The possible reason for this finding is the inhibitory effect of nicotine, one of the many harmful by-products of tobacco smoke, on the manifestation of the early signs of periodontal disease, because of its local vasoconstrictive action.

The observation made in the present study that current users have a significantly higher number of teeth with periodontal pockets is inconsistent with the studies done by Gautam et al.[17] Akaji et al., and [19] Katuri et al.[20] Among current users, chewers demonstrated a significantly higher number of teeth with periodontal pockets which are in accordance with the studies conducted by Robertson et al.[21] and Chu et al.[22] It was observed in this study that the number of teeth with attachment loss greater than 5 mm was more in those participants who reported the use of both forms of tobacco compared to exclusive smokers and chewers. This is in accordance with the studies reported by Katuri et al.,[20] Monten et al.,[23] Amarasena et al.,[24] and Mittal et al.[25] Verma et al.[26] reported greater attachment loss among tobacco chewers in a study conducted among gutkha chewers in the Delhi NCR region. The rational explanations for the more severe destruction of periodontal attachment apparatus among subjects consuming smokeless tobacco forms are manifold. Few justifications in this direction could be comparatively high blood nicotine levels among chewers than smokers, mechanical injury and irritation caused by holding smokeless forms of tobacco in close proximity to the gingival tissue, and higher incidence of gingival hyperemia among chewers caused by the aggravation of inflammatory reactions by smokeless tobacco.[26] The results from this study inform the oral health care professionals about the form-dependent association between tobacco and periodontal health and help them better play their roles in the arena of primary health care. There is a necessity for these care providers to undergo training on tobacco cessation counseling, since the majority of tobacco users already know the negative influence of tobacco on oral and general health, and it is not only the knowledge that needs to be shared but also the attitude that needs to be changed.[27],[28]


  Conclusion Top


The study confirms the negative influence of tobacco consumption on periodontal health and also establishes the increased destruction of clinical attachment levels among tobacco chewers compared to smokers. In light of the proven negative association between periodontal disease and systemic health of an individual, these findings give a heads up for the dental fraternity to get more actively involved in tobacco cessation counseling and directly participate in health promotion, in general, and oral health promotion in particular.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form, the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
GATS. Global Adult Tobacco Survey: Fact sheet, India 2016-17; 2017. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/surveillance/survey/gats/GATS_India_2016-17_FactSheet.pdf. [Last accessed on 2019 Nov 08].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
US NCI and WHO. The economics of tobacco and tobacco control. National Cancer Institute (Tobacco Control Monograph 21, NIH Publication No. 16-CA-8029). Bethesda, MD; 2016. Available from: http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/brp/tcrb/monographs/21/index.html. [Last accessed on 2019 Aug 22].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Committee on the Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age for Purchasing Tobacco Products; Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice; Institute of Medicine; Bonnie RJ, Stratton K, Kwan LY, editors. Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal Access to Tobacco Products. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2015 July 23. 4, The Effects of Tobacco Use on Health.   Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Leite FR, Nascimento GG, Scheutz F, López R. Effect of smoking on periodontitis: A systematic review and meta-regression. Am J Prev Med 2018;54:831-41.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Johnson NW. The role of the dental team in tobacco cessation. Eur J Dent Educ 2004;8:18-24.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Chaiton M, Diemert L, Cohen JE, Bondy SJ, Selby P, Philipneri A, et al. Estimating the number of quit attempts it takes to quit smoking successfully in a longitudinal cohort of smokers. BMJ Open 2016;6:e011045.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (US) Office on Smoking and Health. Atlanta (GA). The health consequences of smoking - 50 years of progress: A report of the surgeon general; 2014.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Gadpyale AK, Usta MS, Kharbanda OP, Jhanjhee S, Murthy P, Munish VG, et al. (2018). Establishment of tobacco cessation centers in dental institutes an integrated approach in India operational guidelines 2018. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Available from: http://www.dciindia.gov.in/Rule_Regulation/FinaloperationalguidelinesTCCindentalcolleges.pdf [Last accessed on 2019 Nov 08].  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Dental Council of India. List of dental colleges those have not established tobacco cessation centres (as on 27.9.2019). Available from: http://www.dciindia.gov.in/Rule_Regulation/List%20of%20TCC%20in%20Dental%20Colleges11.pdf. [Last accessed on 2019 Nov 11].  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Ryan H, Trosclair A, Gfroerer J. Adult current smoking: Differences in definitions and prevalence estimates—NHIS and NSDUH, 2008. J Environ Public Health 2012;2012:918368.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Agaku IT, Awopegba AJ, Filippidis FT. The impact of inter-survey differences in the definition of current smokeless tobacco use on comparability of US national and state-specific prevalence estimates, 2009-2011. Prev Med 2015;74:86-92.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Hummel J, Phillips KE, Holt B, Hayes C. Oral health: An essential component of primary care. Seattle, WA: Qualis Health; June 2015.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Gambhir RS. Primary care in dentistry - An untapped potential. J Family Med Prim Care 2015;4:13-8.  Back to cited text no. 13
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
14.
Warnakulasuriya S. Effectiveness of tobacco counseling in the dental office. J Dent Educ 2002;66:1079-87.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Zhang Y, He J, He B, Huang R, Li M. Effect of tobacco on periodontal disease and oral cancer. Tob Induc Dis 2019;17:40.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Mukherjee K, Hadaye RS. Gutkha its determinants among secondary school male students. Indian J Community Med 2006;31:177.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Gautam DK, Jindal V, Gupta SC, Tuli A, Kotwal B, Thakur R. Effect of cigarette smoking on the periodontal health status: A comparative, cross sectional study. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2011;15:383-7.  Back to cited text no. 17
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
18.
Feldman RS, Bravacos JS, Rose CL. Association between smoking different tobacco products and periodontal disease indexes. J Periodontol 1983;54:481-7.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Akaji EA, Folaranmi N. Tobacco use and oral health of inmates in a Nigerian prison. Niger J Clin Pract 2013;16:473-7.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
20.
Katuri KK, Alluri JK, Chintagunta C, Tadiboina N, Borugadda R, Loya M, et al. Assessment of periodontal health status in smokers and smokeless tobacco users: A cross-sectional study. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10:ZC143-6.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Robertson PB, Walsh M, Greene J, Ernster V, Grady D, Hauck W. Periodontal effects associated with the use of smokeless tobacco. J Periodontol 1990;61:438-3.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Chu YH, Tatakis DN, Wee AG. Smokeless tobacco use and periodontal health in a rural male population. J Periodontol 2010;81:848-54.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Montén U, Wennström JL, Ramberg P. Periodontal conditions in male adolescents using smokeless tobacco (moist snuff). J Clin Periodontol 2006;33:863-8.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Amarasena N, Ekanayaka AN, Herath L, Miyazaki H. Tobacco use and oral hygiene as risk indicators for periodontitis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2002;30:115-23.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Mittal S, Dani N, Abullais S, Al-Qahtani N, Shah K. Effect of smoking and tobacco chewing on periodontal disease and non-surgical treatment outcome: A clinical and biochemical study. J Int Acad Periodontol 2018;20:12-8.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Verma SK, Kumar BD, Singh S, Kumari P, Agarwal A, Singh TK, et al. Effect of gutkha chewing on periodontal health and oral hygiene of peoples in Delhi NCR region of North India: A cross-sectional multicentered study. J Family Med Prim Care 2019;8:564-7.  Back to cited text no. 26
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
27.
Muniandy S. Knowledge on smoking and periodontal disease: A cross-sectional survey among targeted respondents. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2019;23:275-80.  Back to cited text no. 27
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
28.
Liu DC, Ho TC, Duangthip D, Gao SS, Lo EC, Chu CH. Dental students' awareness, preparedness and barriers towards managing tobacco-using patients-A cross-sectional study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16. pii: E1862. doi: 10.3390/ijerph 16101862.  Back to cited text no. 28
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]


This article has been cited by
1 Prevalence, knowledge, attitude and nicotine dependence among ESI-insured populations of Delhi NCR region: Institutional study
Aashita Agarwal,Lakshita Singh,Mansi Atri,Mayank Gupta,Abhimanyu Sharma,Deepak Passi
Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 2020; 9(10): 5271
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
   
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
   Abstract
  Introduction
   Materials and Me...
  Results
  Discussion
  Conclusion
   References
   Article Figures
   Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed720    
    Printed5    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded118    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal