Breen H J, Johnson N W, Rogers P A
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Medicine and Pathology, Guy's School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK.
J Periodontol. 1999 Mar;70(3):312-28. doi: 10.1902/jop.1999.70.3.312.
Site-specific attachment level change, detected from sequential physical probing measurements, is currently the most common method of determining the progression/regression or stability of disease status in subjects with chronic adult periodontitis. The sensitivity and accuracy of detection is dependent on the type of probe used, the recording method, the measurement error, and the method of data analysis. In recent years, there has been world-wide interest in developing instruments and methods to minimize measurement error. Published data report disturbingly wide variation in the prevalences and rates of site-specific attachment level change which are difficult to reconcile with biological likelihood. The present paper aims to summarize the salient points from the key studies and to compare the results.
The literature between 1982 and 1997 was reviewed for studies in which site-specific attachment level change was detected by physical probing methods in patients with chronic adult periodontitis.
The review documents 23 studies by probe generation, compares methods and results and summarizes the results according to the thresholds and probe type used. The 23 studies used an array of probe types from the 3 probe generations.
From this review, we conclude that: 1) There are surprisingly few papers which have addressed the question of site-specific attachment level change in untreated chronic adult periodontitis. 2) There are considerable differences in the probes used, in the thresholds achieved, in the number of measurements taken, in the number of subjects and sites studied, and in the duration of the studies. Valid comparisons between studies are, therefore, rarely possible. 3) Only 8 out of 23 papers from 1982 to 1997 have adequate data. Most papers report only losing sites and therefore ignore many of the measurements recorded. Only one paper describes losing sites, gaining sites, and sites showing exacerbation/remission patterns of change. 4) The range of changes described show such variation that it has to be concluded that we cannot reliably detect site-specific attachment level change by physical probing and thus, at the end of the 20th century, we have no clear idea of the natural history of this disease.
通过连续的物理探测测量检测特定部位附着水平的变化,是目前确定慢性成人牙周炎患者疾病状态进展/消退或稳定性的最常用方法。检测的敏感性和准确性取决于所用探针的类型、记录方法、测量误差以及数据分析方法。近年来,全球都对开发仪器和方法以尽量减少测量误差感兴趣。已发表的数据报告显示,特定部位附着水平变化的患病率和发生率存在令人不安的广泛差异,这很难与生物学可能性相协调。本文旨在总结关键研究的要点并比较结果。
回顾了1982年至1997年间关于通过物理探测方法检测慢性成人牙周炎患者特定部位附着水平变化的研究文献。
该综述按探针类型记录了23项研究,比较了方法和结果,并根据所用阈值和探针类型总结了结果。这23项研究使用了三代探针中的一系列探针类型。
通过本次综述,我们得出以下结论:1)令人惊讶的是,很少有论文探讨未经治疗的慢性成人牙周炎中特定部位附着水平变化的问题。2)在所用探针、达到的阈值、测量次数、研究的受试者和部位数量以及研究持续时间方面存在相当大的差异。因此,很少能够在研究之间进行有效的比较。3)1982年至1997年的23篇论文中只有8篇有足够的数据。大多数论文只报告了丧失附着的部位,因此忽略了许多记录的测量数据。只有一篇论文描述了丧失附着的部位、获得附着的部位以及显示病情加重/缓解变化模式的部位。4)所描述的变化范围差异如此之大,以至于不得不得出结论,我们无法通过物理探测可靠地检测特定部位附着水平的变化,因此,在20世纪末,我们对这种疾病的自然病程尚无清晰的认识。