MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.17796/jcpd.30.4.9n1852u276583r3v

Медицинская библиотека · The Journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2006

Comparison between two visible biofilm indices in the primary dentition.

dos Santos Ana Paula Pires, Soviero Vera Mendes

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

The aim of this study was to compare two visible biofilm indices in the primary dentition. The sample consisted of 90 children of both sexes, aged up to 4 years old outpatients of the University Hospital of the Rio de Janeiro State University. A single examiner, aided by an assistant, performed the children's dental examination for biofilm assessment. A simplified visible biofilm index (BF1), which classifies biofilm as absent, thin or thick, in anterior and/or posterior teeth, and provides a score for the patient and not for each tooth, was compared to a conventional visible biofilm index, the visible plaque index, (BF2), which classifies biofilm as absent or present and provides scores for three surfaces of each tooth. A statistically significant association and a strong positive correlation between BF1 and BF2 was found (Kruskal-Wallis p < 0.001/rs = 0.81 p < 0.001). The time required to BF1 evaluation was approximately one third of the time required to BF2 evaluation (t test p < 0.001). These results suggest that the use of a simplified visible biofilm index is feasible in the primary dentition as it showed similar findings when compared to a conventional one, besides being more practical and quicker.

Для цитирования: dos Santos Ana Paula Pires, Soviero Vera Mendes. Comparison between two visible biofilm indices in the primary dentition.. The Journal of clinical pediatric dentistry. 2006. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.30.4.9n1852u276583r3v.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.