Klinische Vergleichsstudie der konventionellen Parodontalsonde mit der Florida Probe an parodontal gesunden und erkrankten Patienten

Abstract

To assess the progress of periodontal therapy, measurements of probing depth and attachment loss are essential. Changes over time can only determine if the measurements are reproducible. The aim of this clinical study was to investigate the reproducibility and comparability of the force-controlled and computer-based Florida Probe in comparison to a conventional periodontal probe. We examined a total of 42 subjects (34 men and 8 women) aged 34 ± 10 years, each with an average of 26 teeth. The examiner was previously calibrated (kappa value > 0.8). Measurements of probing depth were taken with a millimeter-scaled periodontal probe (UNC15) and the force-controlled Florida Probe at 6 defined points per tooth. Each subject was twice tested alternately with both instruments, at intervals of 7 to 14 days. Statistical analysis was performed using non-parametric ANOVA. A total of 26556 values were collected with a variation range of 1 - to 10 mm. Each measuring cycle consisted of 6639 values. The measured values with the periodontal probe differed significantly from the values measured with the Florida Probe (p <0.01). The probing with the conventional periodontal probe provided in general higher values. The average probing depth with the conventional probe was 2.30 mm ± 1.00 mm and for the Florida Probe 1.85 mm ± 0.83 mm. The measurement differences were mainly found in the posterior sextants and were minor in the anterior sextants. The differences between the two probes were significant in all sextants (p <0.01). The Florida Probe showed on repeated measurement (1.81 mm ± 0.82 mm) significantly correlated values measured in the first passage (1.89 mm ± 0.84 mm) (R = 0.73, p <0.01). The conventional periodontal probe showed between the first messurement (2.31 mm ± 1.02 mm) and the second messurement (2.30 mm ± 0.98 mm) also a significantly associated correlation (R = 0.80, p <0.01) . The measured values of both probes correlated with each other (Pearson"s R = 0.83), but the correlation diminished with increasing probing depth. In conclusion:1. The standard deviation of the measurement results of both probes were in a clinically tolerable range of 1 mm. Both probes showed statistically significant reproducible values.2. In practices with a focus on periodontal therapy (periodontal reinvestigations, several investigators, patient motivation), the Florida Probe shows (through the audio message, direct digital storage, printable diagrams and working without assistance) clear benefits.3. The periodontal probe showed a better reproducibility and tactility than the Florida Probe. Thus, the periodontal probe is still considered the gold standard for single and initial periodontal investigations.