مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

video

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

sound

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Version

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

View:

196
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Download:

129
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

Gingival Thickness Assessment: Visual versus Direct Measurement

Pages

  149-154

Abstract

 Background and Aim: Several methods have been suggested to measure Gingival thickness. This study aimed to assess the reliability of visual assessment of facial Gingival biotype of maxillary and mandibular teeth with or without using a periodontal probe in comparison with direct measurement. Materials and Methods: Sixty-seven healthy patients (25 women and 42 men) with a total of 100 hopeless teeth were selected for this study. Three methods were used to evaluate Gingival thickness namely visual assessment, visual assessment with the use of periodontal probe and direct measurement using a caliper after extracting the hopeless tooth. One trained examiner performed all examinations. Patient demographics, tooth position, and the results of three assessments were recorded. The mean and standard deviation of Gingival thickness were calculated. The three methods were compared using the chi-square test. Results: The accuracy of visual assessment method for the “ thin biotype” was 96. 7% [positive predictive value (PPV)=96. 7%], while it was 10. 3% for “ thick biotype” [negative predictive value (NPV)=10. 3%]. The accuracy of visual assessment with the use of periodontal probe for the thin biotype was 100% (PPV=100%), while it was 17. 1% for the thick biotype (NPV=17. 1%). The results of visual assessment method alone and with the use of periodontal probe were incorrect in 37% and 29% of the cases, respectively and this difference was significant (P<0. 01). Conclusion: Gingival biotype identification by assessment with the use of periodontal probe is an adequately reliable method while visual assessment of Gingival biotype by itself is not sufficient for proper diagnosis.

Multimedia

  • No record.

    • Cites

  • No record.

    • References

  • No record.

    • Cite

    APA: Copy

    SHARIATMADAR AHMADI, R., TAVASSOLI, R., SAYAR, F., GHAFFARI, K., & SARLATI, F.. (2016). Gingival Thickness Assessment: Visual versus Direct Measurement. JOURNAL OF IRANIAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION (JIDA) (MAJALLAH-I-DANDANPIZISHKI), 28(4), 149-154. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/715745/en

    Vancouver: Copy

    SHARIATMADAR AHMADI R., TAVASSOLI R., SAYAR F., GHAFFARI K., SARLATI F.. Gingival Thickness Assessment: Visual versus Direct Measurement. JOURNAL OF IRANIAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION (JIDA) (MAJALLAH-I-DANDANPIZISHKI)[Internet]. 2016;28(4):149-154. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/715745/en

    IEEE: Copy

    R. SHARIATMADAR AHMADI, R. TAVASSOLI, F. SAYAR, K. GHAFFARI, and F. SARLATI, “Gingival Thickness Assessment: Visual versus Direct Measurement,” JOURNAL OF IRANIAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION (JIDA) (MAJALLAH-I-DANDANPIZISHKI), vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 149–154, 2016, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/715745/en

    Related Journal Papers

  • No record.

    • Related Seminar Papers

  • No record.

    • Related Plans

  • No record.

    • Recommended Workshops






    Move to top
    telegram sharing button
    whatsapp sharing button
    linkedin sharing button
    twitter sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    sharethis sharing button