File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Reproducibility of automated periodontal probing around teeth and osseointegrated oral implants

TitleReproducibility of automated periodontal probing around teeth and osseointegrated oral implants
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. 455-464 How to Cite?
AbstractThree different probing devices (Audio-Probe®, Florida-Probe®, Peri-Probe®) were tested in order to determine the clinical probing depth (CPD) around clinically stable oral implants and their homologous teeth and to evaluate their reproducibility. In all 37 patients, in the age range of 24-80 years, who had undergone periodontal therapy and placement of 1 or more oral implants (ITI®), were selected for the study. The CPD was determined on 75 oral implants in total and at 4 sites of both the implants and the control teeth at 3 visits, each 1 week apart. At the 1st visit, the Florida-Probe® and the Audio-Probe® were used. At the 2nd visit, the Florida-Probe® and the Peri-Probe® and, at the 3rd visit, again, the Florida-Probe® and the Audio-Probe® were used. At each visit bleeding on probing (BOP) was registered. A statistically significant (P<0.05) difference between the mean scores of implant and tooth sites was found showing slightly higher values for implant sites. A tendency for the deeper pockets to bleed more frequently than the shallow pockets was observed. The comparisons of differences of the readings of the Audio-Probe® on 2 different occasions were smaller than for the Florida-Probe®. However, comparisons between 2 different probes showed significantly greater measurement errors than when comparing the probes alone. There was a tendency for the Peri-Probe® to yield the highest and the Audio-Probe® the lowest values in inflamed sites. It was concluded that all 3 probing devices appeared to have adequate reproducibility both around teeth and oral implants. For clinical use in daily practice, the Audio-Probe® was found to be the most simple device with the highest reproducibility. © Munksgaard 1997.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154011
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.464
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.427
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChristensen, MMen_US
dc.contributor.authorJoss, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorLang, NPen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:22:48Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:22:48Z-
dc.date.issued1997en_US
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Implants Research, 1997, v. 8 n. 6, p. 455-464en_US
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154011-
dc.description.abstractThree different probing devices (Audio-Probe®, Florida-Probe®, Peri-Probe®) were tested in order to determine the clinical probing depth (CPD) around clinically stable oral implants and their homologous teeth and to evaluate their reproducibility. In all 37 patients, in the age range of 24-80 years, who had undergone periodontal therapy and placement of 1 or more oral implants (ITI®), were selected for the study. The CPD was determined on 75 oral implants in total and at 4 sites of both the implants and the control teeth at 3 visits, each 1 week apart. At the 1st visit, the Florida-Probe® and the Audio-Probe® were used. At the 2nd visit, the Florida-Probe® and the Peri-Probe® and, at the 3rd visit, again, the Florida-Probe® and the Audio-Probe® were used. At each visit bleeding on probing (BOP) was registered. A statistically significant (P<0.05) difference between the mean scores of implant and tooth sites was found showing slightly higher values for implant sites. A tendency for the deeper pockets to bleed more frequently than the shallow pockets was observed. The comparisons of differences of the readings of the Audio-Probe® on 2 different occasions were smaller than for the Florida-Probe®. However, comparisons between 2 different probes showed significantly greater measurement errors than when comparing the probes alone. There was a tendency for the Peri-Probe® to yield the highest and the Audio-Probe® the lowest values in inflamed sites. It was concluded that all 3 probing devices appeared to have adequate reproducibility both around teeth and oral implants. For clinical use in daily practice, the Audio-Probe® was found to be the most simple device with the highest reproducibility. © 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.meshAdulten_US
dc.subject.meshAgeden_US
dc.subject.meshAged, 80 And Overen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Implantation, Endosseousen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Implantsen_US
dc.subject.meshDiagnosis, Computer-Assisteden_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontal Attachment Loss - Diagnosis - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontal Indexen_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontal Pocket - Diagnosis - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshPeriodontics - Instrumentation - Statistics & Numerical Dataen_US
dc.subject.meshRegression Analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshReproducibility Of Resultsen_US
dc.titleReproducibility of automated periodontal probing around teeth and osseointegrated oral implantsen_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.pmid9555204-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0031318155en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0031318155&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume8en_US
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.spage455en_US
dc.identifier.epage464en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000070990500004-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChristensen, MM=9533438400en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridJoss, A=7005904584en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLang, NP=7201577367en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats