The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Pcp unc 15 periodontal probe

Manufactured by Hu-Friedy
Sourced in United States

The PCP-UNC 15 periodontal probe is a dental instrument designed to measure the depth of periodontal pockets during a dental examination. It features a markings scale that allows for precise measurement of pocket depth.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

Lab products found in correlation

11 protocols using pcp unc 15 periodontal probe

1

Long-Term Stability of Peri-Implant Soft Tissues

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In the present 10-year follow-up study, the endpoint was the stability evaluation of the KMW over time, defined as the height of the KM in the apico-coronal direction from the mucogingival junction to the margin of the peri-implant mucosa [3 (link)]. To fulfil this aim, all patients initially enrolled were recalled for a follow-up examination. Apico-coronal measurements were registered clinically at each treated site using a PCP-UNC15 periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL, USA) rounded to the nearest millimeter. To compare the KMW registered at 1 year and 5 years from the surgical procedure, the same reference points used in the 5-year study were used [39 ]. In particular, the prosthetic zenith at each implant crown was used to replicate the same position of the measurement during the study periods. Thus, the KMW was measured from the mucogingival junction to the peri-implant mucosa margin at the prosthetic zenith of each implant crown (Fig. 1).

Clinical intraoral image illustrating KMW measurements performed 1 year, 5 years and 10 years after the soft tissue augmentation procedure. The black lines indicate, at each implant site, the KMW measured from the mucogingival junction to the peri-implant mucosa margin at the prosthetic zenith of each implant crown

+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Long-Term Stability of Peri-Implant Soft Tissues

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In the present 10-year follow-up study, the endpoint was the stability evaluation of the KMW over time, defined as the height of the KM in the apico-coronal direction from the mucogingival junction to the margin of the peri-implant mucosa [3 (link)]. To fulfil this aim, all patients initially enrolled were recalled for a follow-up examination. Apico-coronal measurements were registered clinically at each treated site using a PCP-UNC15 periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL, USA) rounded to the nearest millimeter. To compare the KMW registered at 1 year and 5 years from the surgical procedure, the same reference points used in the 5-year study were used [39 ]. In particular, the prosthetic zenith at each implant crown was used to replicate the same position of the measurement during the study periods. Thus, the KMW was measured from the mucogingival junction to the peri-implant mucosa margin at the prosthetic zenith of each implant crown (Fig. 1).

Clinical intraoral image illustrating KMW measurements performed 1 year, 5 years and 10 years after the soft tissue augmentation procedure. The black lines indicate, at each implant site, the KMW measured from the mucogingival junction to the peri-implant mucosa margin at the prosthetic zenith of each implant crown

+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Peri-implant and Periodontal Tissue Measurements

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The clinical KT height (the distance from the soft tissue margin at the teeth and implants to the mucogingival line) was measured by the same calibrated examiner (Antonio Liñares) at the mid‐buccal area of the teeth and implants using a PCP UNC 15 periodontal probe to the nearest 0.5 mm (Hu‐Friedy®, Chicago, IL). The mucogingival line was identified at those areas (if present), and the probe was placed parallel to the long axis of the teeth and implants, measuring the distance from the soft tissue margin to the mucogingival line. This distance was measured at baseline (after suturing) and at 1, 2, and 3 months.
The clinical secondary outcome was gingival/mucosal recession. The position of the gingival/mucosal margin was recorded after the suturing. The reference point was the IS at the implants and the CEJ at the teeth in the mid‐buccal area on the distal roots. At the implant sites, the flaps were re‐positioned to the level of the IS. Thus, the distance from the gingival/mucosal margin to the CEJ or IS was measured at baseline and at 3 months using the PCP UNC 15 periodontal probe.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Evaluating Gingival Recession Surgical Outcomes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Initial visits consisted of oral hygiene instructions, ultrasonic scaling, and polishing, carried out a month before surgery in both the groups. For assessment of oral hygiene and overall gingival health, Plaque Index[20 (link)] and Gingival Index[21 (link)] Scores were obtained at all time intervals. Following clinical parameters were recorded at all time intervals postsurgery:
(1) Gingival recession depth (GRD) calculated as distance between the apical-most point of the CEJ and GM, (2) PD calculated as the distance from GM to the base of the gingival sulcus, (3) clinical attachment level (CAL) calculated as the distance from the CEJ to the bottom of the sulcus and (4) apicocoronal width of keratinized tissue (KTW) measured as the distance from the mucogingival junction (MGJ) to the GM, with the MGJ location determined using a visual method. These measurements were calculated using periodontal probe (PCP-UNC 15 periodontal probe, Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL). Percentages of mean root coverage (MRC) and CRC were determined at 3 and 6 months after surgery according to standard formulae.[22 ]
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Evaluating Periodontal Parameters After SRP

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Plaque index (PI),28 (link) gingival index (GI),29 (link) bleeding on probing (BOP),30 (link) probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were measured using periodontal probe (PCP-UNC 15 periodontal probe Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL, USA) at baseline. At the 4th and 8th week after SRP; PI, GI, and BOP were recorded. All periodontal parameters were again measured at the 12th week. PI and GI were recorded at four sites per tooth and BOP, PD, and CAL were recorded at six sites per tooth in all teeth except third molars. BOP was assessed in a dichotomous manner and was calculated as the percentage of sites positive for BOP. Maxillary labial gingival coverage by upper lip in resting position was also assessed in the study population.
All clinical periodontal examinations were carried out by a single, calibrated investigator (M.K.) to preclude inter-examiner variability. A calibration exercise was performed until reproducibility in >85% of measurements done on two occasions 48 h apart was achieved.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Detailed Periodontal Measurement Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
At baseline and 3 months later we took the following clinical measurements for each periodontal defect: gingival recession (GR), at mid-buccal aspect of the tooth, from the CEJ to the most apical extension of gingival margin; probing depth (PD), at mid-buccal aspect of the tooth, from the gingival margin to the bottom of the sulcus; clinical attachment level (CAL), at mid-buccal aspect of the tooth, from the CEJ to the bottom of the sulcus; recession width (RW), at CEJ level; gingival thickness (GT), at mid-buccal aspect of the tooth, on a long axis 3 mm apically from the gingival margin (using K-file 25 ISO with a silicon marker); keratinized tissue (KT), from the most apical point of gingival margin to the muco-gingival junction (MGJ); plaque index (PI), at four aspects of the tooth (O’Leary et al., 1972) [15 (link)]; bleeding on probing (BOP), at four points: mesio-vestibular (mv), mid-vestibular (v), disto-vestibular (dv), mid-lingual (l) (Ainamo&Bay 1975) [16 (link)].
All measurements were taken by a calibrated examiner (AS) with the PCP UNC15 periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL, USA) and rounded to the nearest 0.5 mm. The intraexaminer reproducibility of GR measurements was assessed at the interclass correlation coefficient >90%.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Comprehensive Periodontal Tissue Assessment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In the present study, as per earlier clinical studies [[10] , [11] (link), [12] ], the periodontal tissue investigation items included the CAL, PPD, BOP, tooth mobility (Mo) [16 ], width of KG, REC, gingival index (GI) [17 (link)], and plaque index (PlI) [18 (link)]. The CAL and PPD were measured using a probing pressure of 25 g with a PCP-UNC-15 periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL), and the measurement was standardized upon performing calibration between measurers before the trial. For BOP, the presence or absence of bleeding was evaluated 10 s after measuring PPD. REC was calculated as the difference between the CAL and PPD.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Comprehensive Periodontal Assessment Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To determine the clinical periodontal status, gingival Index (GI), plaque Index (PI), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BoP), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were recorded at mesiobuccal, midbuccal, distobuccal, mesiolingual, midlingual, and distolingual sites of each tooth using a PCPUNC15 periodontal probe (Hu Friedy, Chicago, IL, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Periodontal Treatment Efficacy Evaluation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Periodontal indexes (PPD, CAL, PI and BOP) were collected prior to the treatment using a PCPUNC 15 periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL, USA) at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Patients were treated as follows: oral hygiene instructions, SRP at sites with PPD > 3 mm using ultrasonic devices (Suprasson Newtron, Satelec, France) and manual curets (Deppeler, Switzerland) under local anesthesia, in 2 sessions within 7 days. Following each session, patients were instructed to rinse with chlorhexidine (0.12%) mouthwash (Eludril, Pierre Fabre, Cahors, France) for 15 days. At 3 months, residual sites with PPD > 3 mm were re-instrumented. All periodontal examinations, as well as SRP, have been performed by the same operator blinded to psychological measurements results.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Comprehensive Periodontal Assessment Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Each periodontal site was measured for (1) pocket depth and (2) clinical attachment loss. The PD and CAL were assessed at the midbuccal, mesiobuccal, and distobuccal sites as described in previous studies.[12 (link)13 (link)] A partial-mouth assessment was performed as a quick, short-spanned assessment that minimized the subject’s discomfort. All the samples were examined by the main investigator after calibration exercises were performed in four patients twice within a week before starting the actual study. The intra-examiner agreement between the two measurements was 94%. The PD and CAL measurements were recorded to the nearest millimeter using a calibrated PCP-UNC 15 periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy Mfg Co., LLC, Chicago, Illinois).
According to CDC-AAP, the burden of periodontitis was assessed and based on the measures of PD and CAL at interproximal sites, the degree of severity was considered.[14 ]
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!