Goldberg P, Matsson L, Anderson H
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1985 Feb;13(1):44-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1985.tb00419.x.
In epidemiologic studies, total recordings of the amount of dental plaque and the degree of gingival inflammation tend to be too time-consuming. Various partial recording methods have accordingly been suggested. However, the validity of these methods when applied to different age groups has not been investigated sufficiently. The aim of the present study was to test whether different systems for partial recording of plaque and gingivitis can take the place of a full-mouth recording in children of different ages and in young adults. Ninety children, divided into three age groups (4-6, 7-9, 14-16 yr), and 30 adults (20-22 yr) were examined. The degree of gingival inflammation was recorded using the Gingival Index and the amount of dental plaque using the Plaque Index. Two partial recording methods were tested. One of these covered the teeth suggested by Ramfjord, modified for children with a primary dentition, and the other the front segment of the maxilla. The results were compared with those from an examination of all tooth surfaces. In all age groups excellent agreement was found between the partial recording method suggested by Ramfjord and a full-mouth recording of both the gingival state and the amount of dental plaque. Examination of the maxillary front segment was less accurate and resulted in a systematic underestimate.
在流行病学研究中,全面记录牙菌斑量和牙龈炎症程度往往耗时过长。因此,人们提出了各种局部记录方法。然而,这些方法应用于不同年龄组时的有效性尚未得到充分研究。本研究的目的是测试不同的牙菌斑和牙龈炎局部记录系统能否替代不同年龄段儿童和年轻成年人的全口记录。研究检查了90名儿童,分为三个年龄组(4 - 6岁、7 - 9岁、14 - 16岁),以及30名成年人(20 - 22岁)。使用牙龈指数记录牙龈炎症程度,使用菌斑指数记录牙菌斑量。测试了两种局部记录方法。其中一种涵盖了Ramfjord建议的牙齿,并针对乳牙列儿童进行了修改,另一种则是上颌前部。将结果与所有牙面检查的结果进行比较。在所有年龄组中,发现Ramfjord建议的局部记录方法与牙龈状态和牙菌斑量的全口记录之间具有高度一致性。对上颌前部的检查准确性较低,导致系统性低估。