1957
DOI: 10.1902/jop.1957.28.4.264
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Application of the Ultrasonic Dental Unit to Scaling Procedures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
19
1

Year Published

1958
1958
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 71 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
19
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In dentistry, ultrasonic technology was first used to power a tool designed for cavity preparation . While the air‐driven handpiece became the instrument of choice for preparing teeth for restorations, in the 1950s, ultrasonic technology resulted in the development of the ‘Cavitron’, the key armamentarium for gross removal of heavy supragingival calculus in the treatment and prevention of periodontal disease .…”
Section: Introductioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…In dentistry, ultrasonic technology was first used to power a tool designed for cavity preparation . While the air‐driven handpiece became the instrument of choice for preparing teeth for restorations, in the 1950s, ultrasonic technology resulted in the development of the ‘Cavitron’, the key armamentarium for gross removal of heavy supragingival calculus in the treatment and prevention of periodontal disease .…”
Section: Introductioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…In the past, the removal of hard deposits was primarily performed with Conflict of interest and source of funding statement hand instruments because sonic and ultrasonic scalers were originally designed for gross scaling and removal of supragingival calculus and stains (Johnson & Wilson 1957). Numerous studies have reported beneficial results from this treatment modality in both clinical and microbiological parameters (Lindhe et al 1984, Badersten et al 1987, Ramfjord et al 1987, Renvert et al 1990, Kaldahl et al 1996, Takamatsu et al 1999.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is probably due both to lack of A number of studies dealing with the ef-objective criteria for evaluation of the re-suits and to lack of clinical relevance of several in vitro studies. By visual inspection of tooth surfaces treated in vivo or in vitro (Johnson & Wilson 1957, Barnes & Schaffer 1960, Hansen & Kardel 1962, Ewen 1966 only gross characteristics of the effects of the various instruments can be observed. More information is obtained by studying the surface contour of ground sections of teeth by light microscopy (Allen & Rhoads 1963, Belting & Spjut 1964.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%