Alves Renato de Vasconcelos, Machion Luciana, Andia Denise Carleto, Casati Márcio Zaffalon, Sallum Antonio Wilson, Sallum Enilson Antonio
Department of Prosthodontics and Periodontics, School of Dentistry at Piracicaba, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Int Acad Periodontol. 2005 Jan;7(1):27-30.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of a conventional manual probe (MP) and an electronic probe, the Florida Probe (FP). Twenty patients with chronic periodontitis were assessed for pocket depth (PD) and clinical attachment level (CAL) by one examiner. Replicate measurements were taken one hour apart with each probe, on anterior teeth, at six sites per tooth. Pearson's correlation test and Student's paired t-test were used for the statistical analysis. The results showed that there were no significant differences in PD between the replicate measurements of both FP and MP (p > 0.05), although the correlation value was higher for FP (r = 0.97, p < 0.01) than for MP (r = 0.54, p < 0.05). Considering CAL, no differences were found between replicate measurements for both FP and MP (p > 0.05) and correlation values were similar (0.57 and 0.64, respectively, p < 0.001). Although the FP showed higher correlation values for PD, no significant differences were found between duplicate measurements for both probes. Thus, both electronic and manual probing measurements seem to be reproducible when assessing periodontal disease.
本研究的目的是评估传统手动探针(MP)和电子探针佛罗里达探针(FP)的可重复性。由一名检查者对20名慢性牙周炎患者的牙周袋深度(PD)和临床附着水平(CAL)进行评估。使用每种探针在患者前牙每颗牙的六个位点每隔一小时进行重复测量。采用Pearson相关检验和学生配对t检验进行统计分析。结果显示,FP和MP的重复测量之间的PD无显著差异(p>0.05),尽管FP的相关值(r = 0.97,p < 0.01)高于MP(r = 0.54,p < 0.05)。对于CAL,FP和MP的重复测量之间均未发现差异(p>0.05),且相关值相似(分别为0.57和0.64,p < 0.001)。尽管FP在PD方面显示出更高的相关值,但两种探针的重复测量之间均未发现显著差异。因此,在评估牙周疾病时,电子探针和手动探针测量似乎都具有可重复性。