Evaluation of pain perception on periodontal probing in patients with dental plaque induced gingivitis and chronic periodontitis - A cross sectional study, Part I.

Balachandran Ashwath; Durai Aishwarya; Elumalai Agila; Muthukali Shanmugam; Vijayarangan Anitha; Muthiah Meenakshi

doi:10.17126/joralres.2022.034

Balachandran Ashwath Department of Periodontology, Chettinad Dental College and Research Institute, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India.
Durai Aishwarya Department of Periodontology, Chettinad Dental College and Research Institute, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India.
Elumalai Agila Department of Periodontology, Chettinad Dental College and Research Institute, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India.
Muthukali Shanmugam Department of Periodontology, Chettinad Dental College and Research Institute, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India.
Vijayarangan Anitha Department of Periodontology, Chettinad Dental College and Research Institute, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India.
Muthiah Meenakshi Department of Periodontology, Chettinad Dental College and Research Institute, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17126/joralres.2022.034

Abstract

Background: Probing of periodontal pockets is an essential part in the diagnosis of periodontal disease. Fifteen to seventy-seven percent of untreated periodontal patients experience pain during probing. Hence, the aim of this study is to evaluate the pain perceived by patients with gingivitis and periodontitis during periodontal probing. The goals of this study were to compare the patients’ pain perception when using a conventional UNC15 probe and a manual pressure sensitive periodontal probe, and to relate the clinical features of gingivitis and periodontitis to the discomfort associated with periodontal probing.
Material and Methods: A total of 475 subjects were recruited into the study. The subjects were initially divided into two groups – Group – A (Gingivitis group—275 patients) and Group – B (Chronic Periodontitis group -200 patients) according to the AAP 1999 Classification. These two groups were further subdivided into two groups each (Gingivitis – Conventional Probe – GCP, Gingivitis – Manual Pressure Sensitive Probe – GMPS, Periodontitis—Conventional Probe – PCP, Periodontitis – Manual Pressure Sensitive Probe – PMPS) using a computer generated program of random numbers.
Results: A significant difference was noted in pain perception when pressure sensitive probe was used compared to conventional UNC-15 probe. Reduced Bleeding on Probing and Pain scores were noted in Chronic periodontitis subjects with use of pressure sensitive probe, which was statistically significant (p<0.001).
Conclusion: Dentistry has changed its focus towards painless dentistry. In this context, the present study presents data towards use of manual pressure sensitive probes, which offers an advantage of low cost when compared to more advanced computerized systems with reduced pain during periodontal examination. It could result in a positive attitude of the patients towards continuous supportive periodontal therapy, thereby monitoring periodontal health.

References

[1]. Hefti AF. Periodontal probing. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1997;8(3):336-56. doi: 10.1177/10454411970080030601. PMID: 9260047.

[2]. Löe H, Theilade E, Jensen SB. Experimental gingivitis in man . J Periodontol (1930). 1965;36:177-87. doi: 10.1902/jop.1965.36.3.177. PMID: 14296927.

[3]. Quirynen M, Dadamio J, Van den Velde S, De Smit M, Dekeyser C, Van Tornout M, Vandekerckhove B. Characteristics of 2000 patients who visited a halitosis clinic. J Clin Periodontol. 2009 Nov;36(11):970-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01478.x. PMID: 19811581.

[4]. Trombelli L, Scapoli C, Orlandini E, Tosi M, Bottega S, Tatakis DN. Modulation of clinical expression of plaque-induced gingivitis. III. Response of "high responders" and "low responders" to therapy. J Clin Periodontol. 2004;31(4):253-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00479.x. PMID: 15016252.

[5]. Tonetti MS, Chapple IL, Jepsen S, Sanz M. Primary and secondary prevention of periodontal and peri-implant diseases: Introduction to, and objectives of the 11th European Workshop on Periodontology consensus conference. J Clin Periodontol. 2015;42 Suppl 16:S1-4. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12382. PMID: 25683242.

[6]. Suzuki JB. Diagnosis and classification of the periodontal diseases. Dent Clin North Am. 1988;32(2):195-216. PMID: 3288510.

[7]. Löe H, Anerud A, Boysen H, Morrison E. Natural history of periodontal disease in man. Rapid, moderate and no loss of attachment in Sri Lankan laborers 14 to 46 years of age. J Clin Periodontol. 1986;13(5):431-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1986.tb01487.x. PMID: 3487557.

[8]. Löe H, Morrison E. Periodontal health and disease in young people: screening for priority care. Int Dent J. 1986;36(3):162-7. PMID: 3533788.

[9]. Page RC, Kornman KS. The pathogenesis of human periodontitis: an introduction. Periodontol 2000. 1997;14:9-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1997.tb00189.x. PMID: 9567963.

[10]. Schätzle M, Löe H, Bürgin W, Anerud A, Boysen H, Lang NP. Clinical course of chronic periodontitis. I. Role of gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol. 2003 Oct;30(10):887-901. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2003.00414.x. Erratum in: J Clin Periodontol. 2004;31(9):813. PMID: 14710769.

[11]. Schätzle M, Löe H, Lang NP, Bürgin W, Anerud A, Boysen H. The clinical course of chronic periodontitis. J Clin Periodontol. 2004;31(12):1122-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00634.x. PMID: 15560816.

[12]. Lang NP, Schätzle MA, Löe H. Gingivitis as a risk factor in periodontal disease. J Clin Periodontol. 2009;36 Suppl 10:3-8. doi:10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01415.x. PMID: 19432625.

[13]. Lang NP, Joss A, Tonetti MS. Monitoring disease during supportive periodontal treatment by bleeding on probing. Periodontol 2000. 1996;12:44-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1996.tb00080.x. PMID: 9567993.

[14]. Lang NP, Bartold PM. Periodontal health. J Clin Periodontol. 2018; 45 Suppl 20:S9-S16. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12936. PMID: 29926485.

[15]. Fine DH, Patil AG, Loos BG. Classification and diagnosis of aggressive periodontitis. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45 Suppl 20:S95-S111. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12942. PMID: 29926487.

[16]. American Academy of Periodontology. The American Academy of Periodontology glossary of periodontal terms. 3rd ed. Chicago: The American Academy of Periodontology. 1992.

[17]. Newman MG, Takei HH, Carranza FA Jr. Carranza’s clinical periodontology, 9th ed. Saunders, Philadelphia, 2002.

[18]. Wang SF, Leknes KN, Zimmerman GJ, Sigurdsson TJ, Wikesjö UM, Selvig KA. Reproducibility of periodontal probing using a conventional manual and an automated force-controlled electronic probe. J Periodontol. 1995; 66(1):38-46. doi:10.1902/jop.1995.66.1.38. PMID: 7891248.

[19]. Pihlstrom BL. Measurement of attachment level in clinical trials: probing methods. J Periodontol. 1992;63(12 Suppl):1072-7. doi: 10.1902/jop.1992.63.12s.1072. PMID: 1479528.

[20]. Renatus A, Trentzsch L, Schönfelder A, Schwar-zenberger F, Jentsch H. Evaluation of an Electronic Periodontal Probe Versus a Manual Probe. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(11):ZH03-ZH07. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/22603.8886. PMID: 2805 0524; PMCID: PMC5198477.

[21]. Badersten A, Nilvéus R, Egelberg J. Reproducibility of probing attachment level measurements. J Clin Periodontol. 1984;11(7):475-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1 984.tb01347.x. PMID: 6589244.

[22]. Walsh TF, Saxby MS. Inter- and intra-examiner variability using standard and constant force periodontal probes. J Clin Periodontol. 1989;16(3):140-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1989.tb01630.x. PMID: 2723096.

[23]. Watts T. Constant force probing with and without a stent in untreated periodontal disease: the clinical reproducibility problem and possible sources of error. J Clin Periodontol. 1987;14(7):407-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1987.tb01545.x. PMID: 3476518.

[24]. Armitage GC. Clinical evaluation of periodontal diseases. Periodontol 2000. 1995;7:39-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1995.tb00035.x. PMID: 9567929.

[25]. van der Velden U, de Vries JH. Introduction of a new periodontal probe: the pressure probe. J Clin Periodontol. 1978;5(3):188-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1978.tb02279.x. PMID: 279547.

[26]. Glavind L, Löe H. Errors in the clinical assessment of periodontal destruction. J Periodontal Res. 1967;2(3):180-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.1967.tb01887.x. PMID: 4237475.

[27]. Mishra A, Priyanka M, Pradeep K, Reddy Pathakota K. Comparative Evaluation of Pain Scores during Periodontal Probing with or without Anesthetic Gels. Anesthesiol Res Pract. 2016;2016:5768482. doi: 10.1155/2016/5768482. PMID: 27034662; PMCID: PMC4789354.

[28]. Ringeling J, Parvini P, Weinbach C, Nentwig GH, Nickles K, Eickholz P. Discomfort/pain due to pocket probing at teeth and endosseous implants: a cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(8):1005-9. doi: 10.1111/clr.12669. PMID: 26183155.

[29]. Combs D. Stedman's medical dictionary. J Family Pract. 1996.

[30]. Rams TE, Slots J. Comparison of two pressure-sensitive periodontal probes and a manual periodontal probe in shallow and deep pockets. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1993;13(6):520-9. PMID: 8181912.

[31]. Perry DA, Taggart EJ, Leung A, Newburn E. Comparison of a conventional probe with electronic and manual pressure-regulated probes. J Periodontol. 1994;65(10):908-13. doi: 10.1902/jop.1994.65.10.908. PMID: 7823271.

[32]. Proye M, Caton J, Polson A. Initial healing of periodontal pockets after a single episode of root planing monitored by controlled probing forces. J Periodontol. 1982;53(5):296-301. doi: 10.1902/jop.1982.53.5.296. PMID: 7045322.