File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis

TitleComparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis
Authors
Issue Date1997
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLR
Citation
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1997, v. 8 n. 6, p. 448-454 How to Cite?
AbstractThe purpose of this study was to compare the tissue resistance to probing and the accuracy of depth determination at different force levels around implants and teeth. In 11 subjects 1 implant and 1 tooth at a comparable location and with comparable probing depth were investigated. The sites were located on either the mesial or distal aspect of the tooth and the implant. A probing device was used which allowed simultaneous monitoring of probing force and probe penetration and which standardized the insertion pathway for repeated measurements. The probing instrument was fitted with an attachment for an aiming device to take a radiograph with the probe tip in the sulcus, using a standardized projection geometry. Probing depth values were determined at 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 N probing force. The standard error of the individual measurement (Si), evaluated by comparison of repeated measurements in the same session, was 0.2 mm on implants and 0.1 mm on teeth. For implants there was a trend for slightly better reproducibility at higher force levels. Curve analysis of depth force patterns showed that a change in probing force had more impact on the depth reading in the peri-implant than in the periodontal situation. The mean distance between the probe tip and the periimplant bone crest amounted to 0.75±0.60 mm at 0.25 N probing force. It is concluded that peri-implant probing depth measurements are more sensitive to force variation than periodontal pocket probing. © Munksgaard 1997.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154010
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.464
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.427
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMombelli, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorMühle, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorBrägger, Uen_US
dc.contributor.authorLang, NPen_US
dc.contributor.authorBürgin, WBen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:22:47Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:22:47Z-
dc.date.issued1997en_US
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Implants Research, 1997, v. 8 n. 6, p. 448-454en_US
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154010-
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to compare the tissue resistance to probing and the accuracy of depth determination at different force levels around implants and teeth. In 11 subjects 1 implant and 1 tooth at a comparable location and with comparable probing depth were investigated. The sites were located on either the mesial or distal aspect of the tooth and the implant. A probing device was used which allowed simultaneous monitoring of probing force and probe penetration and which standardized the insertion pathway for repeated measurements. The probing instrument was fitted with an attachment for an aiming device to take a radiograph with the probe tip in the sulcus, using a standardized projection geometry. Probing depth values were determined at 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 N probing force. The standard error of the individual measurement (Si), evaluated by comparison of repeated measurements in the same session, was 0.2 mm on implants and 0.1 mm on teeth. For implants there was a trend for slightly better reproducibility at higher force levels. Curve analysis of depth force patterns showed that a change in probing force had more impact on the depth reading in the peri-implant than in the periodontal situation. The mean distance between the probe tip and the periimplant bone crest amounted to 0.75±0.60 mm at 0.25 N probing force. It is concluded that peri-implant probing depth measurements are more sensitive to force variation than periodontal pocket probing. © Munksgaard 1997.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLRen_US
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Implants Researchen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Implantation, Endosseousen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Implantsen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Plaque Indexen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshJaw, Edentulous, Partially - Rehabilitationen_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontal Attachment Loss - Diagnosis - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontal Indexen_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontal Pocket - Diagnosis - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontics - Instrumentationen_US
dc.subject.meshRadiography, Dentalen_US
dc.subject.meshReproducibility Of Resultsen_US
dc.subject.meshStress, Mechanicalen_US
dc.titleComparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailLang, NP:nplang@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityLang, NP=rp00031en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.pmid9555203en_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0031318150en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0031318150&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume8en_US
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.spage448en_US
dc.identifier.epage454en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000070990500003-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMombelli, A=7006180872en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMühle, T=6506132829en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBrägger, U=7005538598en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLang, NP=7201577367en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBürgin, WB=7003413848en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats