Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Instrumentation during the second stage of periodontal therapy: a European survey
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Instrumentation during the second stage of periodontal therapy: a European survey
Do you wish to request the book?
Instrumentation during the second stage of periodontal therapy: a European survey
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Instrumentation during the second stage of periodontal therapy: a European survey
2022
Overview
Abstract ObjectivesTo gather practice-based information about instrumentation during the second stage of periodontal therapy among the members of the European Federation of Periodontology.MethodsThis survey was conducted to investigate periodontal instrumentation (e.g., frequency, instruments, their maintenance) during the second stage of periodontal therapy.ResultsQuestionnaires from 2008 responders actively involved in periodontal therapy (general dental practitioners, periodontists, and dental hygienists) were analyzed. The frequency of use of hand and mechanical instruments was similar during the second stage of periodontal therapy and 94.4% of the participants combined both. The most popular hand instruments were Gracey curettes, and the preferred mechanical devices were ultrasonic scalers. For the latter, mostly the combination of standard and micro/slim inserts was preferred (42.4%) over solely standard inserts (32.1%) or micro/slim inserts (25.5%). The wear of hand instruments was sytematically checked by 46.1% of the respondents and the wear of the inserts by 41.3%. The more experienced the dental professional, the more frequent the wear of the instruments and inserts was checked.ConclusionThe most popular periodontal instrumentation technique in clinical practice during the second stage of periodontal therapy is a combination of hand and mechanical instruments.Clinical relevanceClinicians should check the wear of their instruments systematically to have the most performant instruments possible for periodontal instrumentation. Scientists should see the results of this questionnaire as an incentive to set up studies investigating whether the combination of hand and mechanical instruments, the preferred treatment method of clinicians, is better than either of these instruments alone.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
