Improved diagnostics: clinical evaluation of a color-coded, polymeric periodontal probe.

Clinical preventive dentistry Pub Date : 1992-07-01
M D Kazmierczak, S G Ciancio, M Mather, L V Dangler, E S Troullos
{"title":"Improved diagnostics: clinical evaluation of a color-coded, polymeric periodontal probe.","authors":"M D Kazmierczak,&nbsp;S G Ciancio,&nbsp;M Mather,&nbsp;L V Dangler,&nbsp;E S Troullos","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy, reproducibility and patient comfort of a newly designed, color-coded, polymeric periodontal probe to a traditional, color-coded metal probe. Twenty-four adult subjects with varying degrees of periodontal disease (from slight to severe) reported for two visits, one week apart. A randomization schedule for probe use was adopted over the two visits so that the gingival crevices in two quadrants were probed with the same probe (metal or polymeric) providing reproducibility information for each probe, while the other two quadrants were probed first with one probe then the other for comparison data yielding information on accuracy. A bleeding index was obtained using the same schedule. Clinical scoring was performed by the same examiner. After probing each quadrant, subjects rated discomfort using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results showed no significant difference in depth readings greater than 2 mm between the polymeric and metal probes (3.41 +/- 0.37 mm vs. 3.38 +/- 0.32 mm, p = 0.55). Significantly less discomfort (assessed by VAS) was recorded by patients after polymeric probe use (3.70 +/- 2.40 cm vs. 4.44 +/- 2.49 cm, p = 0.015). The bleeding index indicated significantly less bleeding with the polymeric probe (0.80 +/- 0.56 vs. 1.24 +/- 0.65, p = 0.0001). Both the polymeric and metal probes were found to produce highly reproducible results in all measures across visits.</p>","PeriodicalId":75715,"journal":{"name":"Clinical preventive dentistry","volume":"14 4","pages":"24-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1992-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical preventive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy, reproducibility and patient comfort of a newly designed, color-coded, polymeric periodontal probe to a traditional, color-coded metal probe. Twenty-four adult subjects with varying degrees of periodontal disease (from slight to severe) reported for two visits, one week apart. A randomization schedule for probe use was adopted over the two visits so that the gingival crevices in two quadrants were probed with the same probe (metal or polymeric) providing reproducibility information for each probe, while the other two quadrants were probed first with one probe then the other for comparison data yielding information on accuracy. A bleeding index was obtained using the same schedule. Clinical scoring was performed by the same examiner. After probing each quadrant, subjects rated discomfort using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results showed no significant difference in depth readings greater than 2 mm between the polymeric and metal probes (3.41 +/- 0.37 mm vs. 3.38 +/- 0.32 mm, p = 0.55). Significantly less discomfort (assessed by VAS) was recorded by patients after polymeric probe use (3.70 +/- 2.40 cm vs. 4.44 +/- 2.49 cm, p = 0.015). The bleeding index indicated significantly less bleeding with the polymeric probe (0.80 +/- 0.56 vs. 1.24 +/- 0.65, p = 0.0001). Both the polymeric and metal probes were found to produce highly reproducible results in all measures across visits.

改进的诊断:临床评估颜色编码,聚合牙周探针。
本研究的目的是比较新设计的彩色标记聚合物牙周探针与传统的彩色标记金属探针的准确性、可重复性和患者舒适度。24名患有不同程度牙周病(从轻微到严重)的成人受试者报告了两次访问,间隔一周。在两次就诊中采用随机化的探针使用计划,以便两个象限的牙龈缝隙用相同的探针(金属或聚合物)探测,提供每个探针的再现性信息,而其他两个象限则先用一个探针探测,然后用另一个探针探测,以获得比较数据,从而获得准确性信息。采用相同的方法测定出血指数。临床评分由同一审查员进行。在探查每个象限后,受试者使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评定不适程度。结果显示,聚合物探针和金属探针在大于2 mm的深度读数上没有显著差异(3.41 +/- 0.37 mm vs. 3.38 +/- 0.32 mm, p = 0.55)。使用聚合物探针后,患者记录的不适(VAS评估)明显减少(3.70 +/- 2.40 cm vs. 4.44 +/- 2.49 cm, p = 0.015)。出血指数显示聚合物探针明显减少出血(0.80 +/- 0.56 vs. 1.24 +/- 0.65, p = 0.0001)。发现聚合物和金属探针在访问期间的所有测量中都产生高度可重复性的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信