PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Increasing evidence indicates that the thickness of periodontal soft tissues plays an important role in various clinical scenarios, thus pointing to the need of further clinical research in this area. Aim of the present study was to assess gingival thickness at the mandibular incisors by translucency judgement with two different probes and to validate if these methods are comparable and applicable as diagnostic tools.
METHODS: A total of 200 participants were included; gingival tissue thickness was measured by judging probe translucency at both central mandibular incisors, mid-facially on the buccal aspect of each tooth using a standard periodontal probe and a set of color-coded probe, each with a different color at the tip, i.e. Colorvue Biotype Probe (CBP). Frequencies and relative frequencies were calculated for probe visibility. Agreement between the standard periodontal probe and the CBP was evaluated via the kappa statistic.
RESULTS: When the periodontal probe was visible, the frequency of CBP being visible was very high. Kappa statistic for the agreement between the standard periodontal probe and the CBP was 0.198 (71.5% agreement; p-value < 0.001) for tooth 41 and 0.311 (74.0% agreement; p-value < 0.001) for tooth 31, indicating a positive association of the two methods.
CONCLUSIONS: An agreement that reached 74% was estimated between the standard periodontal probe and the color-coded probe at central mandibular incisors. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In the context of the present study, the two methods of evaluating gingival thickness seem to produce comparable measurements with a substantial agreement. However, in the 1/4 of the cases, the visibility of the color-coded probe could not assist in the categorization of the gingival phenotype.
METHODS: A total of 200 participants were included; gingival tissue thickness was measured by judging probe translucency at both central mandibular incisors, mid-facially on the buccal aspect of each tooth using a standard periodontal probe and a set of color-coded probe, each with a different color at the tip, i.e. Colorvue Biotype Probe (CBP). Frequencies and relative frequencies were calculated for probe visibility. Agreement between the standard periodontal probe and the CBP was evaluated via the kappa statistic.
RESULTS: When the periodontal probe was visible, the frequency of CBP being visible was very high. Kappa statistic for the agreement between the standard periodontal probe and the CBP was 0.198 (71.5% agreement; p-value < 0.001) for tooth 41 and 0.311 (74.0% agreement; p-value < 0.001) for tooth 31, indicating a positive association of the two methods.
CONCLUSIONS: An agreement that reached 74% was estimated between the standard periodontal probe and the color-coded probe at central mandibular incisors. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In the context of the present study, the two methods of evaluating gingival thickness seem to produce comparable measurements with a substantial agreement. However, in the 1/4 of the cases, the visibility of the color-coded probe could not assist in the categorization of the gingival phenotype.
摘要：
目的：越来越多的证据表明，牙周软组织的厚度在各种临床情况下都起着重要作用，因此需要在这一领域进行进一步的临床研究。本研究的目的是通过使用两种不同的探针进行半透明性判断来评估下颌切牙的牙龈厚度，并验证这些方法是否具有可比性并可用作诊断工具。
方法：共纳入200名参与者；通过判断两个下颌中央切牙的探头透明度来测量牙龈组织厚度，使用标准牙周探针和一组颜色编码的探针，在每颗牙齿的颊侧表面上，每个尖端都有不同的颜色，即Colorvue生物型探针(CBP)。计算探头能见度的频率和相对频率。通过kappa统计量评估标准牙周探针与CBP之间的一致性。
结果：当牙周探针可见时，可见CBP的频率非常高。标准牙周探针与CBP之间的一致性的Kappa统计量对于牙齿41为0.198（71.5％一致性；p值<0.001），对于牙齿31为0.311（74.0％一致性；p值<0.001），表明两种方法呈正相关。
结论：在标准牙周探针和彩色编码探针在下颌中央切牙之间达到了74％的一致性。临床意义：在本研究的背景下，评估牙龈厚度的两种方法似乎产生了相当的测量结果，并取得了实质性的一致。然而,在1/4的案件中，颜色编码探针的可见性不能帮助牙龈表型的分类.
方法：共纳入200名参与者；通过判断两个下颌中央切牙的探头透明度来测量牙龈组织厚度，使用标准牙周探针和一组颜色编码的探针，在每颗牙齿的颊侧表面上，每个尖端都有不同的颜色，即Colorvue生物型探针(CBP)。计算探头能见度的频率和相对频率。通过kappa统计量评估标准牙周探针与CBP之间的一致性。
结果：当牙周探针可见时，可见CBP的频率非常高。标准牙周探针与CBP之间的一致性的Kappa统计量对于牙齿41为0.198（71.5％一致性；p值<0.001），对于牙齿31为0.311（74.0％一致性；p值<0.001），表明两种方法呈正相关。
结论：在标准牙周探针和彩色编码探针在下颌中央切牙之间达到了74％的一致性。临床意义：在本研究的背景下，评估牙龈厚度的两种方法似乎产生了相当的测量结果，并取得了实质性的一致。然而,在1/4的案件中，颜色编码探针的可见性不能帮助牙龈表型的分类.
