It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the accuracy and reliability of digital versus conventional clinical measurements of the width of keratinized tissue. To this end, the keratinized tissue width was measured at 110 tooth sites in 5 pig jaws. The measurements were made at each site using three-dimensional (3D) scanned images and a periodontal probe. The actual keratinized tissue width was subsequently measured on histologic slides prepared from the same sites, and differences between the histologic slides and the digital and clinical measurements were analyzed to determine their accuracy in two measurement rounds. Furthermore, intrarater and interrater reliabilities were evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Here we show that the mean differences (and lower/upper limits of agreement) between the histologic and the digital/clinical measurements were 0.10 mm (−1.34/1.54 mm) and 1.11 mm (−0.69/2.92 mm), respectively, in the first round of measurements (p < 0.01), and 0.04 mm (−1.52/1.59 mm) and 1.05 mm (−0.37/2.48 mm) in the second round of measurements (p < 0.01). Moreover, we found that the intrarater reliability was higher for the digital measurements (ICC = 0.97, confidence interval [CI] = 0.96–0.97) than for the clinical measurements (ICC = 0.87, CI = 0.86–0.89; p < 0.01). Taken together, our results demonstrate that digital measurements of the keratinized tissue width using 3D scanned images can replace conventional clinical measurements using a periodontal probe since they are more accurate and reliable.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details



1 College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Department of Periodontology, Research Institute for Periodontal Regeneration, Seoul, Republic of Korea (GRID:grid.15444.30) (ISNI:0000 0004 0470 5454)
2 Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.7400.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0650); Medical University of Vienna, Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, Vienna, Austria (GRID:grid.22937.3d) (ISNI:0000 0000 9259 8492); University of Chile, Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Santiago, Chile (GRID:grid.443909.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 0385 4466)
3 Yonsei University, Department of Preventive Dentistry & Public Oral Health, College of Dentistry, Seoul, Republic of Korea (GRID:grid.15444.30) (ISNI:0000 0004 0470 5454)
4 Medical University of Vienna, Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, Vienna, Austria (GRID:grid.22937.3d) (ISNI:0000 0000 9259 8492)