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, S G Ciancio, M Mather, L V Dangler, 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.
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。