Priscila Corraini1, Rodrigo López. 1. Section of Periodontology, Department of Dentistry, Health, Aarhus University, Vennelyst Boulevard 9, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark, priscilacorraini@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the intra-examiner reliability of recordings of subgingival calculus detected using an ultrasonic device, and to investigate the influence of subject-, tooth- and site-level factors on the reliability of these subgingival calculus recordings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On two occasions, within a 1-week interval, 147 adult periodontitis patients received a full-mouth clinical periodontal examination by a single trained examiner. Duplicate subgingival calculus recordings, in six sites per tooth, were obtained using an ultrasonic device for calculus detection and removal. RESULTS: Agreement was observed in 65 % of the 22,584 duplicate subgingival calculus recordings, ranging 45 % to 83 % according to subject. Using hierarchical modeling, disagreements in the subgingival calculus duplicate recordings were more likely in all other sites than the mid-buccal, and in sites harboring supragingival calculus. Disagreements were less likely in sites with PD ≥ 4 mm and with furcation involvement ≥ degree 2. Bleeding on probing or suppuration did not influence the reliability of subgingival calculus. At the subject-level, disagreements were less likely in patients presenting with the highest and lowest extent categories of the covariate subgingival calculus. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The reliability of subgingival calculus recordings using the ultrasound technology is reasonable. The results of the present study suggest that the reliability of subgingival calculus recordings is not influenced by the presence of inflammation. Moreover, subgingival calculus can be more reliably detected using the ultrasound device at sites with higher need for periodontal therapy, i.e., sites presenting with deep pockets and premolars and molars with furcation involvement.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the intra-examiner reliability of recordings of subgingival calculus detected using an ultrasonic device, and to investigate the influence of subject-, tooth- and site-level factors on the reliability of these subgingival calculus recordings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On two occasions, within a 1-week interval, 147 adult periodontitispatients received a full-mouth clinical periodontal examination by a single trained examiner. Duplicate subgingival calculus recordings, in six sites per tooth, were obtained using an ultrasonic device for calculus detection and removal. RESULTS: Agreement was observed in 65 % of the 22,584 duplicate subgingival calculus recordings, ranging 45 % to 83 % according to subject. Using hierarchical modeling, disagreements in the subgingival calculus duplicate recordings were more likely in all other sites than the mid-buccal, and in sites harboring supragingival calculus. Disagreements were less likely in sites with PD ≥ 4 mm and with furcation involvement ≥ degree 2. Bleeding on probing or suppuration did not influence the reliability of subgingival calculus. At the subject-level, disagreements were less likely in patients presenting with the highest and lowest extent categories of the covariate subgingival calculus. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The reliability of subgingival calculus recordings using the ultrasound technology is reasonable. The results of the present study suggest that the reliability of subgingival calculus recordings is not influenced by the presence of inflammation. Moreover, subgingival calculus can be more reliably detected using the ultrasound device at sites with higher need for periodontal therapy, i.e., sites presenting with deep pockets and premolars and molars with furcation involvement.