Reproducibility of automated periodontal probing around teeth and osseointegrated oral implants

Three different probing devices (Audio-Probe, Florida-Probe, Peri-Probe) were tested in order to determine the clinical probing depth (CPD) around clinically stable oral implants and their homologous teeth and to evaluate their reproducibility. In all 37 patients, in the age range of 24-80 years, who had undergone periodontal therapy and placement of 1 or more oral implants (ITI), were selected for the study. The CPD was determined on 75 oral implants in total and at 4 sites of both the implants and the control teeth at 3 visits, each 1 week apart. At the 1st visit, the Florida-Probe and the Audio-Probe were used. At the 2nd visit, the Florida-Probe and the Peri-Probe and, at the 3rd visit, again, the Florida-Probe and the Audio-Probe were used. At each visit bleeding on probing (BOP) was registered. A statistically significant (P < 0.05) difference between the mean scores of implant and tooth sites was found showing slightly higher values for implant sites. A tendency for the deeper pockets to bleed more frequently than the shallow pockets was observed. The comparisons of differences of the readings of the Audio-Probe on 2 different occasions were smaller than for the Florida-Probe. However, comparisons between 2 different probes showed significantly greater measurement errors than when comparing the probes alone. There was a tendency for the Peri-Probe to yield the highest and the Audio-Probe the lowest values in inflamed sites. It was concluded that all 3 probing devices appeared to have adequate reproducibility both around teeth and oral implants. For clinical use in daily practice, the Audio-Probe was found to be the most simple device with the highest reproducibility.