[A comparison between 4 subgingival bacteriologic sampling technics].

Journal de biologie buccale Pub Date : 1991-03-01
M Sixou, D Duffaut-Lagarrigue, J P Lodter
{"title":"[A comparison between 4 subgingival bacteriologic sampling technics].","authors":"M Sixou,&nbsp;D Duffaut-Lagarrigue,&nbsp;J P Lodter","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A comparative study of four classical techniques employed in the sampling of subgingival microflora (paper points, swabbing, curette and washing followed by aspiration) has been carried out. This study was based upon quantitative criteria (number of bacteria sampled) and qualitative criteria (number of morphologically distinct colonies found per sampling technique). Sampling was done on three different groups of patients: a control group, a group of patients with gingivitis and a group of patients with periodontitis. The curette sampling technique was found to be efficient both quantitatively and qualitatively. Difficulties in standardizing this method however were encountered with the failure to achieve reproducible results. For this reason the technique of paper point was preferred. This method was found to be more reliable and reproducible in each of the three groups of patients sampled.</p>","PeriodicalId":75983,"journal":{"name":"Journal de biologie buccale","volume":"19 1","pages":"16-21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal de biologie buccale","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

A comparative study of four classical techniques employed in the sampling of subgingival microflora (paper points, swabbing, curette and washing followed by aspiration) has been carried out. This study was based upon quantitative criteria (number of bacteria sampled) and qualitative criteria (number of morphologically distinct colonies found per sampling technique). Sampling was done on three different groups of patients: a control group, a group of patients with gingivitis and a group of patients with periodontitis. The curette sampling technique was found to be efficient both quantitatively and qualitatively. Difficulties in standardizing this method however were encountered with the failure to achieve reproducible results. For this reason the technique of paper point was preferred. This method was found to be more reliable and reproducible in each of the three groups of patients sampled.

4种龈下细菌学取样方法的比较
对龈下菌群取样的四种经典技术(纸点、拭子、刮刀和洗涤后吸吸)进行了比较研究。本研究基于定量标准(采样细菌数量)和定性标准(每种采样技术发现的形态不同的菌落数量)。对三组不同的患者进行了抽样:对照组,牙龈炎患者组和牙周炎患者组。在定量和定性两方面,都发现刮管取样技术是有效的。然而,由于无法获得可重复性的结果,该方法在标准化方面遇到了困难。因此,首选纸点技术。该方法在三组患者样本中均具有较高的可靠性和可重复性。
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