A Comparison Between the Repeatability of Probing Pocket Depths Achieved With Manual and Automated Periodontal Probes

NHS Foundation Trust

Status

Completed

Conditions

Periodontal Disease

Treatments

Device: Florida Probe automated probe

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT01622192

STH 16290

Details and patient eligibility

About

The aim of the study is to determine the best method for measuring the extent and severity of the gum disease by comparing the repeatability of probing depths achieved by a manual probe when compared to an automated probe.

Hypothesis

The null hypothesis to be tested includes

The automated probe does not improve the reproducibility of periodontal probing when compared to manual probing recordings
The automated probe shows no advantage when comparing the reproducibility of
- Moderate sites
- Deep sites
- Single vs. multirooted teeth
- Different sextants
- Different surfaces of teeth Buccal vs. palatal/lingual Mesial vs. mid vs. distal

Full description

Measuring the clinical attachment loss using a periodontal probe is the benchmark by which attachment loss is diagnosed in periodontal disease. The accuracy and reproducibility of the probing measurements is an essential part of diagnosis, treatment planning and assessment of the treatment outcome. There are inherent errors associated with probing that have been identified in the literature. These relate to the operator technique, the probe used and the state of inflammation of the periodontal pocket/crevice.

The aim of this study is to compare the reproducibility of probing measurements using a probe tip with millimeter markings up to 15mm in the Florida probe ® handpiece. This tip will be used to allow conventional clinical measurements to be recorded at the same time as the electronic recordings on the Florida probe ®. The examiner would take the manual probe measurement and be blind to the electronic reading taken. The sites under question will have a second measurement recorded to allow assessment of the repeatability of the recordings. Therefore, from 2 probing passes 4 measurements would be obtained 2 manual and 2 electronic readings.

Enrollment

30 patients

Sex

All

Ages

18+ years old

Volunteers

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

Age 18 and over
Diagnosis of periodontitis (any form) but must have at least 2 sites in at least 1 sextant with a BPE code 4( pockets ≥ 5.5mm) at the time of screening
Patient consent gained and has agreed to be a part of the study

Exclusion criteria

Any medical condition that would exclude them from having the measurements taken
Any medical problem that would make participation difficult
If they do not have sufficient sites where probing depths are required.