ABSTRACT
Background: Probing of the periodontal pocket is an essential part of the diagnosis of periodontal disease and 15-77% of untreated periodontal patients experience pain during probing. Therefore, the objective of this study is to evaluate the pain perceived by patients with dental plaque-induced gingivitis and chronic periodontitis during periodontal probing and the main objective includes the evaluation of the relationship between pain perceived during periodontal probing and gingival inflammatory parameters. Material and Methods: A total of 475 participants were recruited into the study. The patients were divided into two groups: Group-A (Gingivitis Group - 275 patients) and Group-B (Chronic Periodontitis Group - 200 patients). Clinical parameters included analysis of bleeding on probing, simplified gingival index, pocket depth on probing, and clinical attachment level. Pain score was recorded using the HP VAS scale and all patients participated in the study after a detailed explanation of the study protocol. Results: A significant difference in pain perception was noted between groups, highlighting the role of the degree of inflammation in the examination of periodontal parameters. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present study, we can conclude that pain perception is directly correlated with the degree of inflammation in periodontitis rather than plaque-induced gingivitis during periodontal probing. Therefore, some form of adjuvant topical anesthesia may be considered in order to reduce pain levels in severely inflamed patients, to encourage continued acceptance of supportive periodontal therapy.
Antecedentes: El sondaje de la bolsa periodontal es una parte esencial en el diagnóstico de la enfermedad periodontal. 15-77% de los pacientes periodontales no tratados experimentan dolor durante el sondaje. Por lo tanto, el objetivo de este estudio es evaluar el dolor percibido por pacientes con gingivitis inducida por placa dental y periodontitis crónica durante el sondaje periodontal y el objetivo principal incluye la evaluación de la relación entre el dolor percibido durante el sondaje periodontal con parámetros inflamatorios gingivales. Material y Métodos: Un total de 475 sujetos fueron reclutados en el estudio. Los sujetos se dividieron en 2 grupos: Grupo - A (Grupo de gingivitis - 275 pacientes) y Grupo - B (Grupo de periodontitis crónica - 200 pacientes). Los parámetros clínicos incluyeron el análisis del sangrado al sondaje, el índice gingival simplificado, la profundidad de la bolsa al sondaje y el nivel de inserción clínica. La puntuación del dolor se registró utilizando la escala HP VAS y todos los pacientes participaron en el estudio después de una explicación detallada del protocolo del estudio. Resultados: Se notó una diferencia significativa en la percepción del dolor en el grupo B que en el grupo A, lo que significa el papel del grado de inflamación en el examen de los parámetros periodontales. Conclusión: Dentro de las limitaciones del presente estudio, podemos concluir que la percepción del dolor se correlaciona directamente con el grado de inflamación que se observa en la periodontitis más que con la gingivitis inducida por la placa dental durante el sondaje periodontal. Por lo tanto, se puede considerar alguna forma de anestesia tópica adyuvante para reducir los niveles de dolor en pacientes gravemente inflamados para fomentar la aceptación continua de la terapia periodontal de apoyo.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Chronic Periodontitis , Pain Perception , Gingivitis , Periodontal Diseases , Periodontal Index , Prospective Studies , India , InflammationABSTRACT
Background: Probing of periodontal pockets is an essential part in the diagnosis of periodontal disease. Fifteen to seventy seven percent of untreated periodontal patients experience pain during probing. Hence the aim of this study is to evaluate the pain perceived by patients with gingivitis and periodontitis during periodontal probing. The goals of this study were to compare the patients' pain perception when using a conventional UNC15 probe and a manual pressure sensitive periodontal probe, and to relate the clinical features of gingivitis and periodontitis to the discomfort associated with periodontal probing. Material and Methods: A total of 475 subjects were recruited into the study. The subjects were initially divided into two groups Group A (Gingivitis group - 275 patients) and Group B (Chronic Periodontitis group -200 patients) according to the AAP 1999 Classification. These two groups were further subdivided into two groups each (Gingivitis Conventional Probe GCP, Gingivitis Manual Pressure Sensitive Probe GMPS, Periodontitis - Conventional Probe PCP, Periodontitis Manual Pressure Sensitive Probe PMPS) using a computer generated program of random numbers. Results: A significant difference was noted in pain perception when pressure sensitive probe was used compared to conventional UNC-15 probe. Reduced Bleeding on Probing and Pain scores were noted in Chronic periodontitis subjects with use of pressure sensitive probe, which was statistically significant (p<0.001). Conclusion: Dentistry has changed its focus towards painless dentistry. In this context, the present study presents data towards use of manual pressure sensitive probes, which offers an advantage of low cost when compared to more advanced computerized systems with reduced pain during periodontal examination. It could result in a positive attitude of the patients towards continuous supportive periodontal therapy thereby monitoring periodontal health.
Antecedentes: El sondaje de los sacos periodontales es una parte esencial en el diagnóstico de la enfermedad periodontal. Del quince al setenta y siete por ciento de los pacientes periodontales no tratados experimentan dolor durante el sondaje. De ahí que el objetivo de este estudio fué evaluar el dolor percibido por pacientes con gingivitis y periodontitis durante el sondaje periodontal. Los objetivos de este estudio fueron comparar la percepción del dolor de los pacientes al usar una sonda UNC15 convencional y una sonda periodontal sensible a la presión manual, y relacionar las características clínicas de la gingivitis y la periodontitis con la incomodidad asociada con el sondaje periodontal. Material y Métodos: Un total de 475 sujetos fueron reclutados en el estudio. Los sujetos se dividieron inicialmente en dos grupos - Grupo - A (grupo de Gingivitis - 275 pacientes) y Grupo - B (grupo de Periodontitis Crónica - 200 pacientes) de acuerdo con la Clasificación AAP 1999. Estos dos grupos se subdividieron en dos grupos cada uno (Gingivitis - Sonda convencional - GCP, Gingivitis - Sonda manual sensible a la presión - GMPS, Periodontitis - Sonda convencional - PCP, Periodontitis - Sonda manual sensible a la presión - PMPS) usando un programa generado por computadora de datos aleatorios. números. Resultados: Se notó una diferencia significativa en la percepción del dolor cuando se usó una sonda sensible a la presión en comparación con la sonda UNC-15 convencional (p<0,001). Conclusion: La odontología ha cambiado su enfoque hacia una odontología sin dolor. En este contexto, el presente estudio presenta datos hacia el uso de sondas manuales sensibles a la presión, que ofrece una ventaja de bajo costo en comparación con sistemas computarizados más avanzados con reducción del dolor durante el examen periodontal. Podría resultar en una actitud positiva de los pacientes hacia la terapia periodontal de apoyo continuo, monitoreando así la salud periodontal.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Periodontitis/therapy , Pain Perception , Gingivitis/therapy , Pain , Periodontal Diseases/therapy , Periodontal Pocket , Cross-Sectional StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The aim of this randomized split-mouth double-blind study was to evaluate whether 4% articaine hydrochloride with 1:100,000 epinephrine administered as a single buccal infiltration in the maxillary posterior sextant can provide palatal anesthesia when compared with 2% lignocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine during scaling and root planing and access flap surgery (AFS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 40 patients with chronic generalized periodontitis requiring periodontal therapy in the maxillary posterior sextants were recruited in this study. About 4% articaine and 2% lignocaine were administered as buccal infiltration in a split-mouth design randomly. The pain scores in the palatal aspect were recorded during scaling and root planing and open flap debridement using Heft-Parker visual analog scale. The onset of anesthesia was also recorded and compared. RESULTS: The success rate for maxillary buccal infiltration to induce palatal anesthesia using articaine was 90% during scaling and root planing and 82.5% during AFS and for lignocaine solution was 20% and 15%, respectively. The difference between the two agents was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The onset of anesthesia between articaine and lignocaine was also found to be statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this study, we observed that the efficacy of 4% articaine was superior to 2% lignocaine to induce palatal anesthesia following maxillary buccal infiltration in maxillary posterior sextants.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Halitosis or oral malodor is characterized by unpleasant odor arising from the oral cavity. The prevalence of halitosis however is not studied extensively. The aim of this study was to evaluate the self perception of oral malodor and oral hygiene habits amongst dental students. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A structured questionnaire consisting of ten questions was administered to 285 undergraduate students of Madha Dental College and Hospital. The questionnaire was designed to evaluate the self perception of halitosis, oral hygiene aids used, presence of dental caries, gingival bleeding, and dryness of mouth. RESULTS: Of the 285 students, 259 students completed the questionnaire. The response rate was 90%, with male response rate being 85.7% and female 95.8%. Self-perceived halitosis was reported by 44.1% males and 45.32% females. The difference in reporting self-perception of halitosis between females and males was found to be statistically significant (P < 0.05). Significant difference was found for use of mouth wash, presence of carious teeth, bleeding gums, and use of tongue cleaners between females and males (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate higher prevalence of halitosis among this population consisting of dental students. The awareness of halitosis was also higher among this population. The awareness of halitosis as an individual entity should be promoted to the general population and the therapeutic measures should be made available to all.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sitelevel plaque removal efficacy of four commercially available toothbrushes. The adjunctive benefit of dental floss on interproximal plaque removal was also evaluated. METHOD AND MATERIALS: This study was designed as a randomized examiner- blinded clinical study involving 60 subjects. The subjects were randomly divided into four groups of 15 participants each, and a particular branded toothbrush was allotted for each group. Brushing technique, toothpaste, and brushing time were standardized for all the subjects. The Turesky- Gilmore-Glickman modification of Quigley-Hein plaque index was used to evaluate plaque scores at baseline, and 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks by one blinded examiner. After 2 weeks, the subjects were provided with dental floss to be used in conjunction with the toothbrush. Buccal, lingual, and interproximal plaque reduction percentages were computed and analyzed for statistical significance. RESULTS: The four toothbrushes showed similar plaque removal scores at the three sites, with no statistical significance (P > .05). The interproximal plaque removal scores of the four toothbrushes were the least at 2 weeks (25%) when compared with buccal (65%) and lingual (60%) percentage scores. The addition of dental floss significantly increased the interproximal plaque removal scores, with 4-week scores revealing 70% removal. CONCLUSION: These data revealed the lack of significance between the four toothbrushes studied, which is in line with previous studies. The addition of dental floss had a significant effect on the interproximal plaque removal, which could be crucial in the maintenance of gingival health.
