A comparative study of conventional and modified instrument design in periodontal therapy

Amit Garg, Pratibha Gopalkrishna, K. M. Bhat, M. Shashidhar Kotian, Asmita Saokar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: The present study was designed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of Slimline ultrasonic inserts with hand instruments in removing subgingival calculus. The topography of root surfaces was also studied using Scanning Electron Microscope following instrumentation. Methods: A sample of 36 posterior teeth, scheduled for extraction, were obtained following instrumentation, from patients with advanced periodontal disease. Twelve teeth in each group were instrumented up to the depth of the pocket and were categorized based on the instrument used: Group A - Gracey curette 11/12 and 13/14, Group B - Gracey curette 15/16 and 17/18, and Group C - Ultrasonic Slimline inserts. The extracted teeth were later subjected to stereomicroscopic examination and SEM analysis. Results: The percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus ranged from 21%- 32% and 22%-32% for Group A, 20%-29% and 22%-30% for Group B, and 18%-26% and 19%-26% for Group C, for mesial and distal surfaces respectively. A statistically significant difference was noted for percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus between the three groups (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: The amount of residual calculus present was least with the use of ultrasonic Slimline inserts compared to Gracey curettes 11/12 & 13/14 and Gracey curettes 15/16 &17/18. However, the difference between the two groups of Gracey curettes was not significant. The results suggest that the usage of ultrasonic scalers with Slimline inserts during subgingival scaling and root planing would prove more effective than using either of the hand instruments alone.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
JournalInternational Journal of Clinical Dentistry
Volume12
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 01-01-2019

Fingerprint

Calculi
Ultrasonics
Tooth
Dental Scaling
Hand
Root Planing
Tooth Extraction
Periodontal Diseases
Therapeutics
Electrons

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Garg, Amit ; Gopalkrishna, Pratibha ; Bhat, K. M. ; Shashidhar Kotian, M. ; Saokar, Asmita. / A comparative study of conventional and modified instrument design in periodontal therapy. In: International Journal of Clinical Dentistry. 2019 ; Vol. 12, No. 1. pp. 1-14.
@article{f8e85ea4f8e2446a9d423ea8b141b720,
title = "A comparative study of conventional and modified instrument design in periodontal therapy",
abstract = "Purpose: The present study was designed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of Slimline ultrasonic inserts with hand instruments in removing subgingival calculus. The topography of root surfaces was also studied using Scanning Electron Microscope following instrumentation. Methods: A sample of 36 posterior teeth, scheduled for extraction, were obtained following instrumentation, from patients with advanced periodontal disease. Twelve teeth in each group were instrumented up to the depth of the pocket and were categorized based on the instrument used: Group A - Gracey curette 11/12 and 13/14, Group B - Gracey curette 15/16 and 17/18, and Group C - Ultrasonic Slimline inserts. The extracted teeth were later subjected to stereomicroscopic examination and SEM analysis. Results: The percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus ranged from 21{\%}- 32{\%} and 22{\%}-32{\%} for Group A, 20{\%}-29{\%} and 22{\%}-30{\%} for Group B, and 18{\%}-26{\%} and 19{\%}-26{\%} for Group C, for mesial and distal surfaces respectively. A statistically significant difference was noted for percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus between the three groups (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: The amount of residual calculus present was least with the use of ultrasonic Slimline inserts compared to Gracey curettes 11/12 & 13/14 and Gracey curettes 15/16 &17/18. However, the difference between the two groups of Gracey curettes was not significant. The results suggest that the usage of ultrasonic scalers with Slimline inserts during subgingival scaling and root planing would prove more effective than using either of the hand instruments alone.",
author = "Amit Garg and Pratibha Gopalkrishna and Bhat, {K. M.} and {Shashidhar Kotian}, M. and Asmita Saokar",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "1--14",
journal = "International Journal of Clinical Dentistry",
issn = "1939-5833",
publisher = "Nova Science Publishers Inc",
number = "1",

}

A comparative study of conventional and modified instrument design in periodontal therapy. / Garg, Amit; Gopalkrishna, Pratibha; Bhat, K. M.; Shashidhar Kotian, M.; Saokar, Asmita.

In: International Journal of Clinical Dentistry, Vol. 12, No. 1, 01.01.2019, p. 1-14.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparative study of conventional and modified instrument design in periodontal therapy

AU - Garg, Amit

AU - Gopalkrishna, Pratibha

AU - Bhat, K. M.

AU - Shashidhar Kotian, M.

AU - Saokar, Asmita

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Purpose: The present study was designed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of Slimline ultrasonic inserts with hand instruments in removing subgingival calculus. The topography of root surfaces was also studied using Scanning Electron Microscope following instrumentation. Methods: A sample of 36 posterior teeth, scheduled for extraction, were obtained following instrumentation, from patients with advanced periodontal disease. Twelve teeth in each group were instrumented up to the depth of the pocket and were categorized based on the instrument used: Group A - Gracey curette 11/12 and 13/14, Group B - Gracey curette 15/16 and 17/18, and Group C - Ultrasonic Slimline inserts. The extracted teeth were later subjected to stereomicroscopic examination and SEM analysis. Results: The percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus ranged from 21%- 32% and 22%-32% for Group A, 20%-29% and 22%-30% for Group B, and 18%-26% and 19%-26% for Group C, for mesial and distal surfaces respectively. A statistically significant difference was noted for percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus between the three groups (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: The amount of residual calculus present was least with the use of ultrasonic Slimline inserts compared to Gracey curettes 11/12 & 13/14 and Gracey curettes 15/16 &17/18. However, the difference between the two groups of Gracey curettes was not significant. The results suggest that the usage of ultrasonic scalers with Slimline inserts during subgingival scaling and root planing would prove more effective than using either of the hand instruments alone.

AB - Purpose: The present study was designed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of Slimline ultrasonic inserts with hand instruments in removing subgingival calculus. The topography of root surfaces was also studied using Scanning Electron Microscope following instrumentation. Methods: A sample of 36 posterior teeth, scheduled for extraction, were obtained following instrumentation, from patients with advanced periodontal disease. Twelve teeth in each group were instrumented up to the depth of the pocket and were categorized based on the instrument used: Group A - Gracey curette 11/12 and 13/14, Group B - Gracey curette 15/16 and 17/18, and Group C - Ultrasonic Slimline inserts. The extracted teeth were later subjected to stereomicroscopic examination and SEM analysis. Results: The percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus ranged from 21%- 32% and 22%-32% for Group A, 20%-29% and 22%-30% for Group B, and 18%-26% and 19%-26% for Group C, for mesial and distal surfaces respectively. A statistically significant difference was noted for percentage of surface area covered by residual calculus between the three groups (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: The amount of residual calculus present was least with the use of ultrasonic Slimline inserts compared to Gracey curettes 11/12 & 13/14 and Gracey curettes 15/16 &17/18. However, the difference between the two groups of Gracey curettes was not significant. The results suggest that the usage of ultrasonic scalers with Slimline inserts during subgingival scaling and root planing would prove more effective than using either of the hand instruments alone.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065044979&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065044979&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85065044979

VL - 12

SP - 1

EP - 14

JO - International Journal of Clinical Dentistry

JF - International Journal of Clinical Dentistry

SN - 1939-5833

IS - 1

ER -