Professional flossing as a diagnostic method for gingivitis in the primary dentition
The aim of this study was to evaluate flossing as a diagnostic method for interproximal gingival bleeding in children. For this crossover study, 23 pre-schoolchildren presenting neither restorations nor approximal carious cavities and with at least 15% of gingival bleeding sites were selected. Exami...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2008 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
| Repositorio: | Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/20730 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10183/20730 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Odontopediatria Periodontia Placa dentaria Gengivite Gingivitis Diagnosis Dentition primary Dental plaque |
| Sumario: | The aim of this study was to evaluate flossing as a diagnostic method for interproximal gingival bleeding in children. For this crossover study, 23 pre-schoolchildren presenting neither restorations nor approximal carious cavities and with at least 15% of gingival bleeding sites were selected. Examinations were performed at three different moments (3-4 days interval). Examinations comprised repeated measurements of two gingival indices with a 10-minute interval in the following sequences: the Ainamo & Bay Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI) followed by the Carter & Barnes flossing index (CBI); CBI followed by GBI; and GBI followed by GBI. Data analysis was performed only for the interproximal sites, considering the GBI as the gold-standard. Agreement between indices, sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were estimated. Percentage agreements in sequences GBI-CBI, CBI-GBI and GBI-GBI were 70.3%, 76.4% and 84.5%, respectively. Validation of flossing in the first sequence (GBI-CBI) resulted in values of 0.61 (95%CI 0.53 – 0.68), 0.72 (95%CI 0.69 – 0.76), 0.33 (95%CI 0.28 – 0.39) and 0.89 (95%CI 0.86 – 0.92) respectively for SE, SP, PPV and NPV. It can be concluded that professional flossing is a useful tool in the diagnosis of interproximal gingival inflammatory status in children, especially in conditions of gingival health. |
|---|