2021
DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1994_20
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative assessment of conventional periodontal probes and CEJ handpiece of electronic probes in the diagnosis and primary care of periodontal disease

Abstract: Objectives: Conventional probes (CPs) have been considered acceptable as diagnostic tools to measure probing pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL) but are affected by multiple variables. Electronic probes (EPs) provide controlled force, digital readout and data storage in computers. The objectives were to compare the reproducibility in the measurement of PPD and CAL by CP and the newly introduced CEJ handpiece of EP and intra-examiner and inter-examiner errors done in two phases. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
(37 reference statements)
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The probing PD was measured with a UNC-15 periodontal probe. [ 14 ] The probe was inserted parallel to the long axis of the tooth gently, till resistance was noted and readings were recorded to the nearest millimeters.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The probing PD was measured with a UNC-15 periodontal probe. [ 14 ] The probe was inserted parallel to the long axis of the tooth gently, till resistance was noted and readings were recorded to the nearest millimeters.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The following clinical data were noted at baseline, followed by postoperative assessments at intervals of three months and six months: plaque index (Turesky-Gilmore-Glickman modification of Quigley Hein) [45], modified gingival index (Lobene 1986) [46,47], PD [48,49], relative vertical clinical attachment level (RVCAL) [50,51], and relative horizontal clinical attachment level (RHCAL) [50,51]. At baseline, three months, and six months, radiographic parameters were noted.…”
Section: Methodology Of Interventionmentioning
confidence: 99%