Comparative evaluation of accuracy of periodontal probing depth and attachment levels using a Florida probe versus traditional probes

BackgroundThe current interest in the assessment of Clinical attachment level (CAL) has stimulated recent introduction of novel periodontal probes. CAL is currently the gold standard for diagnosis and monitoring of periodontal disease. The errors inherent to the use of a periodontal probe are variation in probing force, visual errors in identifying the cemento–enamel junction (CEJ), relative attachment level landmarks, fluctuations in gingival inflammation and misrecording measurements. The present study has been undertaken to compare the accuracy of measuring probing depth (PD) and CAL using Florida probe and Williams probe.MethodsAfter random selection of sixty subjects PD and CAL were measured at mandibular first molars region using Williams probe, Florida probe and CEJ probe by two different examiners. The measurements recorded by using three probes were subjected to statistical analysis for comparison of accuracy and reproducibility.ResultsDifference in mean PD with Williams probe and Florida probe were statistically significant with p value of .000. Similarly the CAL measurement achieved by Williams probe and CEJ probe showed significant different results. More consistent results were seen with Florida probe and CEJ probe when the measurements of PD and CAL were done by two different examiners.ConclusionFlorida probe and CEJ probe have been shown to be more accurate and were found to be more consistent which were reproducible by two independent examiners.