Comparison of calculus detection among dental hygienists using an explorer and ultrasonic insert.

INTRODUCTION

Periodontal therapy disrupts the biofilm harbouring calculus that triggers inflammation. The explorer is primarily used for calculus detection, and the ultrasonic instrument is primarily used for calculus removal. The efficiency in dental hygiene care may improve if the ultrasonic instrument could be used in both calculus detection and removal.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to validate the effectiveness of calculus detection between the Thinsert® ultrasonic insert and the 11/12 explorer.

METHODS

Upon IRB approval, this validation study involved three dental hygiene faculty from the Ohio State University Dental Hygiene Program and 30 patient participants from the Ohio State University community. Using both instruments, calculus was evaluated on Ramfjord index teeth and on four possible surfaces per tooth. Data were analysed to evaluate for interrater reliability, intrarater reliability, sensitivity, and specificity.

RESULTS

For interrater reliability, the average measure of intraclass coefficient (ICC) value was 0.782 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.749-0.810 (F  = 4.852, P < 0.01). For intrarater reliability, mean Kappa averages were in the full agreement range (κ = 0.726, n = 2160, P < 0.01). When using the Thinsert® for calculus detection, the sensitivity was 75%, specificity was 97%, PPV was 81%, and NPV was 94%.

CONCLUSION

Since calculus evaluation was comparable when using the ODU 11/12 explorer and the Thinsert®, efforts can be focused on developing the tactile sensitivity when using the Thinsert® ultrasonic instrument in the assessment, treatment, and maintenance of periodontal disease and the support of oral health. The efficiency in dental hygiene care may improve by using the Thinsert® ultrasonic instrument in both the detection and removal of calculus.