Effectiveness of subgingival instrumentation with power-driven instruments in the hands of experienced and inexperienced operators. A study on manikins.

Abstract

Power instrumentation of periodontally-diseased root surfaces is gaining in significance as an alternative to conventional curette methods. In an experimental study employing manikins with simulated bone loss, we investigated whether inexperienced and experienced operators were able to achieve greater therapeutic success with power-driven devices than with hand instruments in subgingival scaling. 10 dentists experienced in periodontal treatment and 10 inexperienced dentists instrumented 7 teeth in the upper jaw, which had been covered with artificial deposits. Hand instruments, the Perioplaner system, a sonic and an ultrasonic scaler were used. The time required for treatment was measured and the % of residual deposits was calculated by means of image-processing techniques. Weight loss was also determined for the teeth that were scaled with the hand instruments and the Perioplaner system. Experienced operators left significantly less % of residual deposits on the teeth (18+/-7.6%) than the inexperienced (27+/-8.4%), regardless of the type of instrument selected. Both experienced and inexperienced operators left the smallest amounts of residual deposits with hand instruments (13+/-9.8%/24+/-9.5%). Both treatment groups removed more hard tooth structure with hand instruments than with the Perioplaner system (53+/-48mg versus 47+/-25.9 mg). Experienced operators needed somewhat more time for debridement than unexperienced. Use of the sonic/ultrasonic device required somewhat less time than hand instrumentation. Inexperienced operators are, however, unable to improve their treatment results by using the power-driven instruments included in the study.