Comparison of Six Different Calculus Indices an In-Vivo Cross-Sectional Study

Agrawal AA1*, Pradnya P1, Shrinivas D2 and Abhishek B3

1Department of Periodontics, MGV’s KBH Dental College and Hospital, India
2Department of Prosthodontics, ACPM Dental College and Hospital, India
3Department of Prosthodontics, SMBT Dental College and Hospital, India

^*Correspondance to: Agrawal Amit Arvind 

 PDF  Full Text Research Article | Open Access

Abstract:

Background: Significance of an index is well-known to the scientific community. However, the choice of a best index among multiple similar indices is a challenge. Considering the differences in scoring criteria, number of teeth examined, clinical applications, etc. the need to compare different calculus indices on similar set of teeth was desirable. Aim and Objective: The aim of this study is to compare 6 different calculus indices to assess their inter- and intra-examiner reliability and reproducibility. In addition to this, the objective was to assess their simplicity, time consumption, ease of clinical application and suitability for clinical trial and/or epidemiological purpose. Materials and Methods: Two examiners examined 50 randomly selected patients, to evaluate six different calculus indices, viz. Oral hygiene index, Sign grading system, periodontal disease index, Calculus surface severity index, Volpe-Manhold index and Marginal line calculus index. Few patients were reassessed by the same examiner to detect the reproducibility. Raw data thus obtained was filtered, tabulated and subjected to statistical calculations. Conclusion: There was no single index which completely fulfils all the ideal requisites to the score 10 on a VAS scale. However, within the limits the study it could be said that Sign Grading System has combined advantages of OHI and PDI and can be included in other basic and/or clinical studies.

Keywords:

Cite the Article:

Agrawal AA, Pradnya P, Shrinivas D, Abhishek B. Comparison of Six Different Calculus Indices an In-Vivo Cross-Sectional Study. Ann Clin Case Rep. 2022; 7: 2290..