We have located links that may give you full text access.
Discomfort/pain due to periodontal and peri-implant probing: Implant type and age.
Journal of Clinical Periodontology 2017 July
AIM: There is evidence that patients experience more discomfort/pain after peri-implant probing than periodontal probing. However, there are several plausible factors to additionally influence this observation: e.g., implant type, age, smoking. Thus, this study was designed to compare discomfort/pain after periodontal and peri-implant probing in different implant types.
METHODS: Two dentists recruited and examined 80 patients, each of them exhibiting a dental implant with a contralateral natural tooth. Only two types of implants were included. Periodontal and peri-implant probing depths (PPD) and probing attachment level (PAL) were assessed. Whether implant or tooth were measured first was randomly assigned. Immediately after probing patients scored discomfort/pain using a visual analogue scale (VAS).
RESULTS: Eighty patients (median; lower/upper quartile: age 57; 47.5/65.5 years; 40 females, 11 smokers) were examined. With the exception of PPD and PAL at the deepest site as well as mean PPD (p < .05) clinical parameters (PAL, bleeding on probing, suppuration) were well balanced between implants and teeth. Peri-implant probing (VAS: 9.0; 5.0/17.0) caused significantly (p = .038) more discomfort/pain than periodontal probing (5.5; 2.0/13.5). This was confirmed by repeated measures analysis of variance adjusting for several factors (p = .011).
CONCLUSIONS: Peri-implant probing caused significantly more discomfort/pain than periodontal probing.
METHODS: Two dentists recruited and examined 80 patients, each of them exhibiting a dental implant with a contralateral natural tooth. Only two types of implants were included. Periodontal and peri-implant probing depths (PPD) and probing attachment level (PAL) were assessed. Whether implant or tooth were measured first was randomly assigned. Immediately after probing patients scored discomfort/pain using a visual analogue scale (VAS).
RESULTS: Eighty patients (median; lower/upper quartile: age 57; 47.5/65.5 years; 40 females, 11 smokers) were examined. With the exception of PPD and PAL at the deepest site as well as mean PPD (p < .05) clinical parameters (PAL, bleeding on probing, suppuration) were well balanced between implants and teeth. Peri-implant probing (VAS: 9.0; 5.0/17.0) caused significantly (p = .038) more discomfort/pain than periodontal probing (5.5; 2.0/13.5). This was confirmed by repeated measures analysis of variance adjusting for several factors (p = .011).
CONCLUSIONS: Peri-implant probing caused significantly more discomfort/pain than periodontal probing.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app