You are here

Home » Content

KONVANSİYONEL VE SABİT BASINÇLI PERIODONTAL SONDLARLA YAPILAN ÖLÇÜMLERİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI VE BİREYSEL FARKLILIKLARIN ANALİZİ

COMPARISON OF THE MEASUREMENTS ACHIEVED WITH A CONVENTIONAL PERIODONTAL PROBE AND A MANUAL PRESSURE SENSITIVE PERIODONTAL PROBE AND THE ANALYSIS OF THE INVESTIGATOR DISCREPANCIES

Journal Name:

  • Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 1997

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of this study was to compare the measurements that were achieved with a conventional periodontal probe and with a manuat pressure sensitive periodontal probe and also to evaluate inter clinician differences according to the periodontal pocket depth measurements on records from periodontitis patients. Fourteen patients with probing pocket depths among 4-6 mm were included m this study. At the beginning of the study Plaque Index and Gingival Index scores were taken from 6 surfaces of Ramfjord teeth. Subsequently probing pocket depth measurements were achieved by three different clinicians by using a modified "Vivacare TPS" and Williams periodontal prohes by giving 60 minutes rest between each scoring. After periodontal treatment inciuding scaling and root planing the same measurements were done by (he same clinicians similarly at the 30lh and 45lh days of the investigation period. According to the results, although the means of the probing values of two different periodontal probes that were achieved at different periods were similarly close, statistically significant differences were detected. Inter-examiner probing values also showed similar results
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmada, periodontitis! i hastaların sondlanabilcn cep derinliği ölçümleri konvansiyonel ve sabit basınçlı olmak üzere iki ayrı periodontal sondia, farklı klirtisyenler tarafından, periodontal tedavi (incesinde ve sonrasında değerlendirilerek, ölçümlerin karşılaştırılması ve bireysel farklılıkların analizi amaçlandı. Sondlanabılen cep derinliği ölçümleri 4-6 mm. arasında değişen 14 erişkin pcriodontiıisli birey çalışmada yer aldı. Öncelikle bireylerin Plak indeks ve Gingival İndeks değerleri Ramfjord dişlerinin 6 bölgesinden, bunu takiben sondlanabilen cep derinliği ölçümleri de 3 ayrı araştırıcı tarafından önce modifiye edilen "Vivacare TPS" periodontal sondu ve 60 dakika sonra ise yine aynı bireyler tarafından "Williams" periodontal sondu kullanılarak elde edildi. Kök kazıması ve düzlestirmesini içeren periodontal Tedaviyi takiben aynı ölçümler aynı araştırıcılar taraflıdan benzer şçkildç 30. ve 45. günlerde tekrarlandı. Sonuç olarak, farklı pcriodfarda, farklı iki periodontal sond ile elde edilen ölçümlerin ortalama değerlerinin birbirlerine yakın olmalarına karşın, istatistiksel olarak değişen oranlarda anlamlı farklar saptandı. Araştırıcılar arasındaki ölçüm değerlerinde de benzer sonuçlar bulgulandı.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-konvansiyonel-sabit-basincli-periodontal-sondlarla-yapilan-olcumlerin-karsilastirilmasi-bireysel-farkliliklarin-analizi.pdf
  • 1
47-52
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Aguero A. Histological location of a standardized periodontal probe in man. J Periodontol 1995; 66(3): 184-190.
2. Armitage GC, SvanbergGK, Loe H. Microscopic evaluation of clinical measurements of connective tissue attachment levels. J Clin Periodontol 1977; 4; 173-190.
3. Caton J, Greenstein G, Poison A. Depth of periodontal probe penetration related to clinical and histologic signs of inflammation, J Periodontol 1981; 52: 626-629.
4. Fowler C, Garrett S, Crigger M, Egelberg J. Histologic probe position in treated and untreated human periodontal tissues. J Clin Periodontol 1982; 9: 373-385.
51
Atatürk Üniv.Diş Hck,Fak.Derg.
Ci!ı:7 Sayı:! Sayfa:47-52,1997
BAL, AKBAY, BAŞMAN, BARAN, BALOŞ
5. Freed HK, Gapper RL, Katkwarf KL. Evaluation of periodontal probing forces. J Periodontol 1983; 54: 488^192.
6. Galgut PN, Waite İM. A comparison between measurements made with a conventional periodontal pocket probe, an electronic pressure probe and measurements made at surgery. Int Dent J İ990; 6; 333-318.
7. Garnick JJ, Keagle JG, Scarle JR. King GE, Thompson WO. Gingival resistance to probing forces. 11. The effect of inflammation and pressure on probe displacement in beagle dog gingivitis, j Periodontol 1989; 60: 498 505.
8. Greenstcin G. Diagnosis of periodontal diseases. Compend Contin fcduc Dent. 1994; 15(6): 750-767.
9. Heft MW, Perelmuter SH, Cooper BY, Magnusson J, Gark WB. Relationship between gingival inflanimation and painfulness of periodontal probing. J Clin Periodontol 1991; 18: 213 215,
10. Hunter F. Periodontal probes and probing. Jnt Dent J 1994; 44: 577-583.
11. Jansen J, Pilot T, Corba N. Histologic evaluation of probe penetration during clinical assessment of periodontal attachment levels. An investigation of experimentally induced periodontal lesions in beagle dogs. J Clin Periodontol 1981; 8: 98-106.
12. Kalkwarf KL, Kaldahl WB, Patil KD. Comparison of manual and pressure-controlled periodontal probing. J Periodontol 1986; 57(8); 467-471.
13. Lang NP, Corbet EF. Periodontal diagnosis in daily practice. Int Dent J 1995; 45: 3-15.
14. Listgarten MA. Periodontal probing: What does it mean? J Clin Periodontol 1980;7: 165-176.
15. Loe H, Silness J Periodontal disease in pregnancy. I. Prevalence and severity. Acta Odontol Scand 1963; 21: 533-551.
16. Machlei EE, Christersson LA, Zambon JJ. Alternative methods for screening periodontal disease in adults. J Gin Periodontol 1993; 20: 81 87.
17. Mayfield L, Bratthall G, Attström R. Periodontal probe precision using 4 different periodontal probes. J Clin Periodontol 1996;23:76-82.
18. Mombelli A, Graf H. Depth-force-patterns in periodontal probing. J Clin Periodontol I9S6; 13: 126-130¬19. Osborn JB, Stoltcnberg JL, Huso BA, Acppli
DM, Philstrom BL- Comparison of measurement variability in subjects with moderate periodontitis using a conventional and constant force periodontal probe. J Periodontol 1992; 63: 283-289.
20. Perry DA, Taggart EJf Leung A, Newbrun E. Comparison of a conventional probe with electronic and manual pressure regulated probes. J Periodontal 1994; 65 (10): 908-913.
21. Pihlstrom BL. Measurement of attachmnet level in clinical trials: Probing methods. J Periodontol 1992; 63 (12): 1072-Î 077.
22. Quirynen M, Callens A, Steenberghe D» Nys M. Clinical evaluation of a constant force electronic probe. J Periodontol 1993; 64(1): 35-39.
23. Rams TE, Slots J. Comparison of two pressure-sensitive probes and a manual periodontal probe in shallow and deep pockets. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1993; 13: 520 529.
24. Robinson PJ, Vitek RM. The relationship between gingival inflammation and resistance to probe penetration. J Pcriodont Res 1979; 14: 239-243¬25. Silness J, Löe H. Periodontal disease in
pregnancy. II. Correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condition. Acta Odontol Scand 1964; 22: 121 135.
26. Van der Yelden U. Probing force and the relationship of the probe to the periodontal tissue. J Clin Periodontol 1979; 6: 106-114.
27. Van
de
r Ve iden Uv .lansen J. Microscopic evaluation of pocket depth measurements performed with sis different probmg forces in dogs, J Clin Periodontol 1981; 8; 107-116.
28. Van der Veldcn U- Location of probe tip in bleeding and non-bleeding pockets with minimal gingival inflammation. J Clin Periodontol 1982; 9: 421-427.
29. Van dcr Zee E, Davies EH, Newman HN. Marking width, calibration from tip and tine diameter of periodontal probes. J Clin Periodontal 1991; 18: 516-520.
30. Walsh TF, Saxby MS. Inter-and intra-examiner variability using standard and constant force periodontal probes. J Clin Periodontol 1989; 16: 140-143.
31. Wang S, Leknes KN, Zimmerman GJ, Sigurdsson T.I. Wikesjo' UME, Sclvıg KA. Reproducibility of periodontal probing using a conventional manual and an automated force-controlled electronic probe. J Periodontol 1995; 66(1): 38-46.
32. Yang MCK, Marks RG, Magnusson I, Clouser B, Clark WB. Reproducibility of an electronic probe in relative attachment level measurements. J Clin Periodontol 1992; 19: 541-548.
33. Zappa J, Simona C, Graf H, Case D, Thomas J. Reliability of single and double probing attachment level measurements. J Clin Periodontol 1995; 22: 764-771.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com