University of Sheffield
Sheffield, South Yorkshire, S10 2SZ, United Kingdom
NCT Number: NCT01622192
The aim of the study is to determine the best method for measuring the extent and severity of the gum disease by comparing the repeatability of probing depths achieved by a manual probe when compared to an automated probe.
Hypothesis
The null hypothesis to be tested includes
* The automated probe does not improve the reproducibility of periodontal probing when compared to manual probing recordings * The automated probe shows no advantage when comparing the reproducibility of
* Moderate sites * Deep sites * Single vs. multirooted teeth * Different sextants * Different surfaces of teeth Buccal vs. palatal/lingual Mesial vs. mid vs. distal
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Sheffield, South Yorkshire, S10 2SZ, United Kingdom
Measuring the clinical attachment loss using a periodontal probe is the benchmark by which attachment loss is diagnosed in periodontal disease. The accuracy and reproducibility of the probing measurements is an essential part of diagnosis, treatment planning and assessment of the treatment outcome. There are inherent errors associated with probing that have been identified in the literature. These relate to the operator technique, the probe used and the state of inflammation of the periodontal pocket/crevice.
The aim of this study is to compare the reproducibility of probing measurements using a probe tip with millimeter markings up to 15mm in the Florida probe ® handpiece. This tip will be used to allow conventional clinical measurements to be recorded at the same time as the electronic recordings on the Florida probe ®. The examiner would take the manual probe measurement and be blind to the electronic reading taken. The sites under question will have a second measurement recorded to allow assessment of the repeatability of the recordings. Therefore, from 2 probing passes 4 measurements would be obtained 2 manual and 2 electronic readings.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Comparisons between the reproducibility of readings taken by an automated probe and a manual probe
Time frame: pocket depth is reassessed at the same visit within 30 minutes
Probing pocket depth with manual and electronic reading on single pass. Measurement repeated for one sextant.
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07725276
Dental Deposits, Dental Plaque
Beirut, Rue de Damas, Lebanon
View Trial DetailsNCT07721428
Cardiovascular Disease, Cardiovascular Diseases
Isparta, Merkez, Turkey (Türkiye)
View Trial DetailsNCT07697963
Mouth Diseases, Periodontal Disease
View Trial DetailsNCT02894463
Mouth Diseases, Periodontal Disease
Nantes, France
View Trial Details