Hull P S, Clerehugh V, Ghassemi-Aval A
Unit of Periodontics, Turner Dental School, Manchester, UK.
J Periodontol. 1995 Oct;66(10):848-51. doi: 10.1902/jop.1995.66.10.848.
Reproducible and accurate measurement of probing depth and attachment levels is important in longitudinal studies and clinical monitoring of patients. The aim of this study was to determine the validity of a constant force electronic probe in comparison with a conventional probe in measuring probing depth. Thirty-three teeth scheduled for extraction from 15 patients were used in the study. Probing depths were measured with a constant force electronic probe and a conventional probe at six sites per tooth prior to extraction. The teeth were extracted, washed, and stained and the actual probing depth measured in the laboratory. The constant force electronic probe showed a consistent systematic bias to under measure pocket depths. The mean difference was 0.48 mm, which was statistically significant (P < 0.01). The conventional probe over measured by a statistically non-significant mean of 0.08 mm (P > 0.05). The measurements with the constant force electronic probe were not affected by the site or the position of the tooth in the mouth. The study demonstrated that the constant force electronic probe under measured the probing depths as determined in the laboratory and was less valid than the conventional probe. However, the validity of probing depth measurements using the constant force electronic probe was clinically acceptable.
在纵向研究和患者临床监测中，可重复且准确地测量牙周探诊深度和附着水平非常重要。本研究的目的是确定在测量牙周探诊深度时，与传统探针相比，恒力电子探针的有效性。该研究使用了15名患者计划拔除的33颗牙齿。在拔牙前，使用恒力电子探针和传统探针在每颗牙齿的六个位点测量牙周探诊深度。牙齿拔除后，进行清洗、染色，并在实验室测量实际的牙周探诊深度。恒力电子探针显示出一致的系统性偏差，测量的牙周袋深度低于实际值。平均差异为0.48毫米，具有统计学意义（P < 0.01）。传统探针测量值高于实际值，平均偏差为0.08毫米，无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。恒力电子探针的测量不受牙齿在口腔中的位点或位置影响。该研究表明，恒力电子探针测量的牙周探诊深度低于实验室确定的实际值，且有效性低于传统探针。然而，使用恒力电子探针测量牙周探诊深度的有效性在临床上是可接受的。
