Birte Holtfreter1, Dietrich Alte, Christian Schwahn, Moïse Desvarieux, Thomas Kocher. 1. Unit of Periodontology, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Periodontology, and Endodontology, University Medicine, Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. birte.holtfreter@uni-greifswald.de
Abstract
AIM: To quantify the digit preference effect for three manual periodontal probes and to calculate correction values to enable comparison of studies with equal recording protocols, but different periodontal probes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective in vivo crossover study was conducted with a six-sequence three-period design. Six examiners assessed attachment loss (AL), probing pocket depth (PD) and gingiva height (GH) at four surfaces, full-mouth, in six generally healthy subjects using three manual probes: PCP11 (3-3-3-2 mm increments), PCP2 (2 mm increments), and PCPUNC15 (1 mm increments). RESULTS: Distributions of AL, PD and GH differed between probes (p < 0.001). Compared with PCPUNC15, periodontal measurements coinciding with probe markings of PCP11 and PCP2, respectively, were preferentially named by examiners. Digit preference was most pronounced for PD, but less for AL and GH. In multilevel models, PD differed significantly between all three probes (p < 0.05); probe- and examiner-related effects were also observed for AL and GH. Correction values for pairwise combinations of probes were determined. CONCLUSIONS: We provided empirical evidence and quantified the effect of probe type on periodontal measurements. Differences in probe type should be considered when comparing periodontal data within and between epidemiological studies and appropriate corrections, provided here, should be applied.
AIM: To quantify the digit preference effect for three manual periodontal probes and to calculate correction values to enable comparison of studies with equal recording protocols, but different periodontal probes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective in vivo crossover study was conducted with a six-sequence three-period design. Six examiners assessed attachment loss (AL), probing pocket depth (PD) and gingiva height (GH) at four surfaces, full-mouth, in six generally healthy subjects using three manual probes: PCP11 (3-3-3-2 mm increments), PCP2 (2 mm increments), and PCPUNC15 (1 mm increments). RESULTS: Distributions of AL, PD and GH differed between probes (p < 0.001). Compared with PCPUNC15, periodontal measurements coinciding with probe markings of PCP11 and PCP2, respectively, were preferentially named by examiners. Digit preference was most pronounced for PD, but less for AL and GH. In multilevel models, PD differed significantly between all three probes (p < 0.05); probe- and examiner-related effects were also observed for AL and GH. Correction values for pairwise combinations of probes were determined. CONCLUSIONS: We provided empirical evidence and quantified the effect of probe type on periodontal measurements. Differences in probe type should be considered when comparing periodontal data within and between epidemiological studies and appropriate corrections, provided here, should be applied.
Authors: Elke Hensel; Dietmar Gesch; Reiner Biffar; Olaf Bernhardt; Thomas Kocher; Christian Splieth; Gabriele Born; Ulrich John Journal: Quintessence Int Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 1.677
Authors: Henry Völzke; Dietrich Alte; Carsten Oliver Schmidt; Dörte Radke; Roberto Lorbeer; Nele Friedrich; Nicole Aumann; Katharina Lau; Michael Piontek; Gabriele Born; Christoph Havemann; Till Ittermann; Sabine Schipf; Robin Haring; Sebastian E Baumeister; Henri Wallaschofski; Matthias Nauck; Stephanie Frick; Andreas Arnold; Michael Jünger; Julia Mayerle; Matthias Kraft; Markus M Lerch; Marcus Dörr; Thorsten Reffelmann; Klaus Empen; Stephan B Felix; Anne Obst; Beate Koch; Sven Gläser; Ralf Ewert; Ingo Fietze; Thomas Penzel; Martina Dören; Wolfgang Rathmann; Johannes Haerting; Mario Hannemann; Jürgen Röpcke; Ulf Schminke; Clemens Jürgens; Frank Tost; Rainer Rettig; Jan A Kors; Saskia Ungerer; Katrin Hegenscheid; Jens-Peter Kühn; Julia Kühn; Norbert Hosten; Ralf Puls; Jörg Henke; Oliver Gloger; Alexander Teumer; Georg Homuth; Uwe Völker; Christian Schwahn; Birte Holtfreter; Ines Polzer; Thomas Kohlmann; Hans J Grabe; Dieter Rosskopf; Heyo K Kroemer; Thomas Kocher; Reiner Biffar; Ulrich John; Wolfgang Hoffmann Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2010-02-18 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Aderonke A Akinkugbe; Gary D Slade; A Sidney Barritt; Stephen R Cole; Steven Offenbacher; Astrid Petersmann; Thomas Kocher; Markus M Lerch; Julia Mayerle; Henry Völzke; Gerardo Heiss; Birte Holtfreter Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2017-09-22 Impact factor: 8.728
Authors: Birte Holtfreter; Ryan T Demmer; Olaf Bernhardt; Panos N Papapanou; Christian Schwahn; Thomas Kocher; Moise Desvarieux Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2012-10-14 Impact factor: 8.728