Premium
Intra‐ and Inter‐Examiner Reproducibility in Keratinized Tissue Width Assessment With 3 Methods for Mucogingival Junction Determination
Author(s) -
Guglielmoni Paola,
Promsudthi Ananya,
Tatakis Dimitris N.,
Trombelli Leonardo
Publication year - 2001
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.2001.72.2.134
Subject(s) - reproducibility , periodontal probe , dentistry , connective tissue , hard tissue , significant difference , medicine , biomedical engineering , orthodontics , chemistry , pathology , chromatography
Background: Although the need for “adequate” amount of keratinized tissue (KT) for periodontal health is questionable, the mucogingival junction (MGJ) often serves as a measurement landmark in periodontal evaluations. Limited information is available on the reproducibility of KT width (KTW) assessment. The purpose of this study was to assess intra‐ and inter‐examiner reproducibility in measuring KTW by using 3 different methods to identify MGJ location. Methods: Fifteen patients provided 17 teeth which had undergone a gingival augmentation procedure (connective tissue graft; surgery group) and an equal number of contralateral, non‐treated teeth (control group). At the midbuccal aspect of each tooth, KTW was assessed by 2 independent examiners after MGJ identification by the visual (VM), functional (FM), and visual with histochemical staining (HM) method. Data analysis was based on intra‐class correlation coefficients (ICC) and 3‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for differences between replicate measurements. Results: KTW was significantly different between treated and control teeth. No significant differences in KTW were found in relation to method for MGJ determination and examiner. Intra‐ and inter‐examiner reproducibility was high, regardless of treatment status or method for MGJ determination (ICC = 0.92 – 0.99). Standard deviations of the difference between replicate measurements ranged from 0.46 mm for VM to 0.21 mm for HM. Conclusions: Intra‐ and inter‐examiner reproducibility has been shown to be substantially consistent when different methods for MGJ determination are used to measure the apico‐coronal dimension of the gingiva. The level of reproducibility does not seem to be affected whether or not the mucogingival complex has been surgically altered by a gingival augmentation procedure. J Periodontol 2001;72:134‐139.