Reddy M S, Palcanis K G, Geurs N C
University of Alabama at Birmingham, School of Dentistry, Department of Periodontics 35294-0007, USA.
J Clin Periodontol. 1997 Dec;24(12):920-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1997.tb01212.x.
This study compared the intra-examiner and inter-examiner error of 2 constant force probes to the reading of a conventional manual probe. 3 examiners made repeated examinations of attachment level using a modified Florida probe and a manual North Carolina probe (read to 1 mm or 0.5 mm); relative attachment level measurements were made using a Florida disk probe. One probe was used in each quadrant in 8 subjects with moderate to advanced periodontitis. Error was calculated as the mean of the absolute value of the difference between each examination, and the correlation between values at each examination calculated. Statistically-significant differences between probe type, examiners, and sites were detected using a repeated measures ANOVA accounting for the nesting within subjects. There was a significant difference in error by probe type (modified Florida probe 0.62 +/- 0.03 mm, r = 0.86; Florida stent probe 0.55 +/- 0.05 mm, r = 0.82; manual probe to 1 mm 0.39 +/- 0.02 mm, r = 0.88; manual probe to 0.5 mm 0.40 +/- 0.02 mm, r = 0.89; (p < 0.001). Significant differences were observed by examiners (p < 0.01). These data indicate that both manual and controlled-force probes can provide measurement within less than 1 mm of error; however, individual calibration of examiners remains important in the reduction of error.
本研究比较了2种恒力探针与传统手动探针读数的检查者内误差和检查者间误差。3名检查者使用改良的佛罗里达探针和手动北卡罗来纳探针（读数精确到1毫米或0.5毫米）对附着水平进行重复检查；使用佛罗里达盘状探针测量相对附着水平。在8名中度至重度牙周炎患者的每个象限中使用一种探针。误差计算为每次检查之间差值绝对值的平均值，并计算每次检查值之间的相关性。使用重复测量方差分析检测探针类型、检查者和部位之间的统计学显著差异，同时考虑受试者内的嵌套情况。不同探针类型的误差存在显著差异（改良佛罗里达探针0.62±0.03毫米，r = 0.86；佛罗里达支架探针0.55±0.05毫米，r = 0.82；精确到1毫米的手动探针0.39±0.02毫米，r = 0.88；精确到0.5毫米的手动探针0.40±0.02毫米，r = 0.89；（p < 0.001）。检查者之间也观察到显著差异（p < 0.01）。这些数据表明，手动探针和恒力探针都能在误差小于1毫米的范围内进行测量；然而，检查者的个体校准对于减少误差仍然很重要。
