IADR Abstract Archives
Level of Agreement Between Clinical Plaque Detection and Intraoral Scanner.
Objectives:
This study aimed to evaluate the agreement between an intraoral scanner system (IOS) and a conventional clinical method for dental plaque detection and registration.
Methods:
14 participants were recruited from the Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Athens. All subjects gave written informed consent, and the protocol was approved by an Ethical Committee. Participants eligible for inclusion were adults with good general health and a minimum of 20 permanent teeth. The examiners were dental professionals calibrated for clinical plaque registration before the study and trained in using the IOS (3Shape TRIOS5). All study participants were clinically examined with plaque assessment on each tooth’s buccal and lingual surface according to the modified Quigley & Hein plaque index before and after using a disclosing agent (GC-Tri Plaque ID-Gel, GC). Then they received professional teeth cleaning, and a third recording of the index scores took place. Before and after the application of disclosing agent and after professional teeth cleaning, all study participants were scanned using the IOS. Three examiners blinded to the clinical examination also assessed plaque status on the acquired 3D models with and without disclosing agent using the same index to evaluate the inter-rater agreement. Interclass coefficient correlation, and Cohen’s Kappa was calculated.
Results:
Cronbach’s α for the scores of the images of 3D models with disclosing agent was found to be 0.775 (0.716 for the scores without disclosing agent). The correlation was stronger for the upper front teeth and the lowest for the mandible front teeth. Cohen’s Kappa for inter-rater reliability was higher when using the 3D models after the disclosing agent (ranging from 0.173 to 0.492- higher for the two more experienced examiners).
Conclusions:
Level of agreement between conventional clinical registration and registration from 3D models was acceptable overall.
This study aimed to evaluate the agreement between an intraoral scanner system (IOS) and a conventional clinical method for dental plaque detection and registration.
Methods:
14 participants were recruited from the Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Athens. All subjects gave written informed consent, and the protocol was approved by an Ethical Committee. Participants eligible for inclusion were adults with good general health and a minimum of 20 permanent teeth. The examiners were dental professionals calibrated for clinical plaque registration before the study and trained in using the IOS (3Shape TRIOS5). All study participants were clinically examined with plaque assessment on each tooth’s buccal and lingual surface according to the modified Quigley & Hein plaque index before and after using a disclosing agent (GC-Tri Plaque ID-Gel, GC). Then they received professional teeth cleaning, and a third recording of the index scores took place. Before and after the application of disclosing agent and after professional teeth cleaning, all study participants were scanned using the IOS. Three examiners blinded to the clinical examination also assessed plaque status on the acquired 3D models with and without disclosing agent using the same index to evaluate the inter-rater agreement. Interclass coefficient correlation, and Cohen’s Kappa was calculated.
Results:
Cronbach’s α for the scores of the images of 3D models with disclosing agent was found to be 0.775 (0.716 for the scores without disclosing agent). The correlation was stronger for the upper front teeth and the lowest for the mandible front teeth. Cohen’s Kappa for inter-rater reliability was higher when using the 3D models after the disclosing agent (ranging from 0.173 to 0.492- higher for the two more experienced examiners).
Conclusions:
Level of agreement between conventional clinical registration and registration from 3D models was acceptable overall.