Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
How to train periodontal endoscopy? Results of a pilot study removing simulated hard deposits in vitro.
Graetz, Christian; Schorr, Susanne; Christofzik, David; Dörfer, Christof E; Sälzer, Sonja.
Afiliação
  • Graetz C; Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, Christian-Albrechts - University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus 26, 24105, Kiel, Germany. graetz@konspar.uni-kiel.de.
  • Schorr S; Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, Christian-Albrechts - University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus 26, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
  • Christofzik D; Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, Christian-Albrechts - University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus 26, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
  • Dörfer CE; Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, Christian-Albrechts - University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus 26, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
  • Sälzer S; Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, Christian-Albrechts - University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus 26, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Clin Oral Investig ; 24(2): 607-617, 2020 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31111282
OBJECTIVES: There is uncertainty regarding the benefits of periodontal endoscopy (PE) for subgingival instrumentation. Moreover, the influence of operators' experience and training with such a device on treatment results is unclear. Therefore, we compared in an in vitro study the use of PE for scaling and root planing (SRP) with the conventional non-surgical therapy, hypothesizing that using a PE allows to remove more simulated hard deposits than without (nPE), influenced by the operators' experience and training. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A sonic device and Gracey curettes were utilized by 11 operators (six dentists, five dental hygienists) in periodontitis manikins heads. The time required for treatment and the proportion of removed simulated hard deposits by SRP were measured. RESULTS: Using the PE led to a significant difference in removal of simulated hard deposits (%) (mean ± SD) irrespective of operators' experience (PE 90.78 ± 12.10% (range 58.80-100%); nPE 79.98 ± 22.15% (range 38.10-100%, p < 0.001)), sub-analyses for different tooth types demonstrated a significant difference in favor of PE for front teeth (p < 0.001) and in the upper jaw independent of the tooth type (p < 0.001). Comparison of treatment times for two quadrants with and without PE showed a significantly longer treatment time with PE (∆22.27 ± 17.98 mins, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the present pilot study, the use of PE led to more removal of simulated hard deposits but was concomitantly related to more time and financial effort. Using PE was most beneficial in the front area. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: PE may provide additional benefits for the removal of hard deposits compared to traditional SRP. The beneficial effect of PE seems not to be influenced by operators experience nor by pocket probing depth.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Endoscopia Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Endoscopia Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article