No abstract

The purpose of the present investigation was to test the association between the BANA test (Perioscan, Oral-B), and oral malodor parameters. The subject population consisted of 52 Israeli adults, 43 of whom complained of oral malodor. Oral malodor measurements consisted of peak and steady-state volatile sulphide measurement by a portable sulphide monitor (Interscan Corp., model 1170), as well as organoleptic measurements of malodor from whole mouth, tongue, and saliva. Samples for the BANA test were obtained from four loci (shallow pocket, deep pocket, tongue dorsum, saliva); results were scored as negative (0), weak (1), or strong (2). BANA scores were significantly associated with odor-judge ratings, with the highest association obtained when BANA saliva scores and odor-judge saliva assessment were compared (r = 0.500; p < 0.001). BANA tests from the different loci were not significantly associated with sulphide monitor levels. Stepwise multiple-regression analysis of odor-judge measurements in terms of sulphide levels and average BANA scores showed that both log peak sulphide levels as well as BANA scores were significantly factored into the equations, yielding, in all cases, highly significant correlations (multiple r = 0.57, 0.50, and 0.59, respectively, with significance levels of 0.0001, 0.001, and < 0.0001, for whole mouth, tongue, and saliva malodor, respectively). The results suggest that the BANA scores are associated with a component of oral malodor which is independent of volatile sulphide measurements and suggest its use as an adjunct test to volatile sulphide measurement.

The purpose of this paper is (1) to investigate the similarity of the amount, distribution, and severity of periodontal disease of the within-patient experimental units, (2) to estimate the relative efficiencies of split-mouth designs when compared to whole-mouth designs, and (3) to discuss how stratification on initial pocket depth can result in large differences in the power of the test-statistics in the different disease categories. Periodontal disease characteristics are not always homogeneously distributed over the within-patient experimental units and this heterogeneity can reduce the efficiency of split-mouth designs. In particular, if analyses are stratified on initial pocket depth, sites with an initial probing depth deeper than 6 mm may be small in number and asymmetrically distributed when compared to sites with an initial probing depth less than 6 mm. This may result in large differences of the power of the test statistics among the different disease categories and should lead to a careful interpretation of the statistical significance tests. When disease characteristics are symmetrically distributed over the within-patient experimental units and a sufficient number of sites is present per experimental unit, the split-mouth design can provide moderate to large gains in relative efficiency. In the absence of a symmetric disease distribution, whole-mouth clinical trials may be preferable.

Clinical trials designed to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of periodontal diagnostic tests often use multiple sites per patient as experimental units of analyses. Since site-specific test results within a patient are dependent observations, a correlated binomial model should be employed to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of these diagnostic tests. Ignoring the within-patient correlation can result in an over- or underestimation of the true standard errors.