147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21574830)
1. Reproducibility of probing depth measurement by an experimental periodontal probe incorporating optical fiber sensor.
Ishihata K; Wakabayashi N; Wadachi J; Akizuki T; Izumi Y; Takakuda K; Igarashi Y
J Periodontol; 2012 Feb; 83(2):222-7. PubMed ID: 21574830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of two automated periodontal probes and two probes with a conventional readout in periodontal maintenance patients.
Barendregt DS; Van der Velden U; Timmerman MF; van der Weijden GA
J Clin Periodontol; 2006 Apr; 33(4):276-82. PubMed ID: 16553636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reproducibility of clinical attachment level and probing depth of a manual probe and a computerized electronic probe.
Alves Rde V; Machion L; Andia DC; Casati MZ; Sallum AW; Sallum EA
J Int Acad Periodontol; 2005 Jan; 7(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 15736893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical evaluation of electronic and manual constant force probes.
Khocht A; Chang KM
J Periodontol; 1998 Jan; 69(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 9527557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Accuracy and reproducibility of two manual periodontal probes. An in vitro study.
Buduneli E; Aksoy O; Köse T; Atilla G
J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Oct; 31(10):815-9. PubMed ID: 15367182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reproducibility of probing depth measurement using a constant-force electronic probe: analysis of inter- and intraexaminer variability.
Araujo MW; Hovey KM; Benedek JR; Grossi SG; Dorn J; Wactawski-Wende J; Genco RJ; Trevisan M
J Periodontol; 2003 Dec; 74(12):1736-40. PubMed ID: 14974813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of two pressure-sensitive periodontal probes and a manual periodontal probe in shallow and deep pockets.
Rams TE; Slots J
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 1993 Dec; 13(6):520-9. PubMed ID: 8181912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of a conventional probe with electronic and manual pressure-regulated probes.
Perry DA; Taggart EJ; Leung A; Newburn E
J Periodontol; 1994 Oct; 65(10):908-13. PubMed ID: 7823271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Reproducibility of periodontal probing using a conventional manual and an automated force-controlled electronic probe.
Wang SF; Leknes KN; Zimmerman GJ; Sigurdsson TJ; Wikesjö UM; Selvig KA
J Periodontol; 1995 Jan; 66(1):38-46. PubMed ID: 7891248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of a new furcation stent as a fixed reference point for class II furcation measurements.
Laxman VK; Khatri M; Devaraj CG; Reddy K; Reddy R
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2009 Mar; 10(2):18-25. PubMed ID: 19279968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Sources of error for periodontal probing measurements.
Grossi SG; Dunford RG; Ho A; Koch G; Machtei EE; Genco RJ
J Periodontal Res; 1996 Jul; 31(5):330-6. PubMed ID: 8858537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of measurement variability in subjects with moderate periodontitis using a conventional and constant force periodontal probe.
Osborn JB; Stoltenberg JL; Huso BA; Aeppli DM; Pihlstrom BL
J Periodontol; 1992 Apr; 63(4):283-9. PubMed ID: 1573541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Comparative probing with an electronic and a manual periodontal probe].
Becherer CF; Rateitschak KH; Hefti AF
Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 1993; 103(6):715-21. PubMed ID: 8322056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of manual and automated probing in an untreated periodontitis population.
Oringer RJ; Fiorellini JP; Koch GG; Sharp TJ; Nevins ML; Davis GH; Howell TH
J Periodontol; 1997 Dec; 68(12):1156-62. PubMed ID: 9444589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Probe penetration in periodontal and peri-implant tissues. An experimental study in the beagle dog.
Abrahamsson I; Soldini C
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2006 Dec; 17(6):601-5. PubMed ID: 17092216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An assessment of the validity of a constant force electronic probe in measuring probing depths.
Hull PS; Clerehugh V; Ghassemi-Aval A
J Periodontol; 1995 Oct; 66(10):848-51. PubMed ID: 8537866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Site-specific attachment level change detected by physical probing in untreated chronic adult periodontitis: review of studies 1982-1997.
Breen HJ; Johnson NW; Rogers PA
J Periodontol; 1999 Mar; 70(3):312-28. PubMed ID: 10225549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of measurement variability using a standard and constant force periodontal probe.
Osborn J; Stoltenberg J; Huso B; Aeppli D; Pihlstrom B
J Periodontol; 1990 Aug; 61(8):497-503. PubMed ID: 2391627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Periodontal probe precision using 4 different periodontal probes.
Mayfield L; Bratthall G; Attström R
J Clin Periodontol; 1996 Feb; 23(2):76-82. PubMed ID: 8849842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Detection of the cemento-enamel junction with three different probes: an "in vitro" model.
Barendregt DS; van der Velden U; Timmerman MF; Bulthuis HM; van der Weijden F
J Clin Periodontol; 2009 Mar; 36(3):212-8. PubMed ID: 19196382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
