Premium
Comparison of a Conventional Probe With Electronic and Manual Pressure‐Regulated Probes
Author(s) -
Perry Dorothy A.,
Taggart Edward J.,
Leung Angela,
Newbrun Ernest
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
journal of periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.036
H-Index - 156
eISSN - 1943-3670
pISSN - 0022-3492
DOI - 10.1902/jop.1994.65.10.908
Subject(s) - wilcoxon signed rank test , significant difference , nuclear medicine , dentistry , consistency (knowledge bases) , block (permutation group theory) , rank correlation , mathematics , mean difference , medicine , orthodontics , analytical chemistry (journal) , biomedical engineering , chemistry , statistics , mann–whitney u test , combinatorics , chromatography , geometry , confidence interval
W e compared the accuracy , consistency, time, comfort, and cost of probing with a conventional hand probe (CP) with 3‐mm banded markings, a manual pressure‐regulated probe (MP), and two electronic probes (IP and FP). Twenty (20) examiners used all four probes on a test block to determine accuracy; measurements compared favorably to the reference block. Two calibrated examiners probed the Ramfjord teeth of 10 periodontal patients on maintenance regimens, six sites per tooth (n = 708), with all four probes; measurements were repeated after one week. Wilcoxon signed‐rank test showed the CP measured more deeply ( P <0.0001) than MP, FP, and IP with mean differences of 0.40, 0.67, and 0.58 respectively. MP measured more deeply ( P <0.001) than FP and IP, with mean differences of 0.27 and 0.18 mm. There was no difference between FP and IP. Time (min:sec) required by one examiner to perform full mouth probing on six subjects (minimum of 26 teeth each) was CP = 3:59; MP = 4:18; FP = 6:16; and IP = 7:23. Subjects rated FP and IP as slightly more uncomfortable than CP or MP. Cost per 1,000 uses was computed based on available data. The IP and FP took longer to perform and cost more per procedure than did the CP and MP. Spearman rank‐order correlation revealed that only probe depths measured by CP and MP were well correlated ( r s = 0.67). Although some statistically significant differences were found between probes, no differences were considered to be of clinical significance when probing periodontally healthy or maintenance patients. Electronic probes were more expensive per use and more time‐consuming than hand probes. J Periodontol 1994;65:908–913 .