Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.
GOOD MORNING
1
2
SUBMITTED BY:
SHEKHAR KUMAR MANDAL
Roll no: 26
BDS IV
GUIDED BY:
DR. NAVRAJ LAMDARI
DR. LAL BABU KAMAIT
DEPARTMENT OF PE...
CONTENTS
REFERENCES
CONCLUSION
RECENT ADVANCES IN PERIODONTAL INDICES
GINGIVAL AND PERIODONTAL DISEASE INDICES
ORAL HYGIEN...
INTRODUCTION
“UNLESS YOU CAN COUNT IT, WEIGH IT OR EXPRESS IT IN A QUANTITATIVE FASHION, YOU HAVE
SCARCELY BEGUN TO THINK ...
DEFINITIONS
• “Epidemiological indices are attempts to quantitate clinical condition on
graduated scale, thereby facilitat...
“An index is an expression of clinical observation in numeric values. It is used to
describe the status of the individual ...
IDEAL REQUISITES OF AN INDEX
7
OBJECTIVES
FOR INDIVIDUAL PATIENT
• Recognize an oral problem
• Effectiveness of present oral
hygiene practices
• Motivati...
Based on the direction in which their scores can
fluctuate:
• Measures condition that can be
changed e.g. periodontal inde...
•Depending upon the extent to which areas of oral
cavity are measured :
Full mouth
indices:
• Patient’s entire
periodontiu...
According to the entity which they measure
• “d” decay portion of the dmf index is the
best example of disease index
Disea...
General indices :
• index that measures the presence or
absence of a condition. e.g. plaque
index
Simple
index:
• index th...
INDICES USED FOR ORAL HYGIENE ASSESSMENT
• Oral hygiene index
• Simplified oral hygiene index
• Patient hygiene performanc...
ORAL HYGIENE INDEX (OHI)
• Developed in 1960 by John C. Green and Jack R. Vermillion in order to classify
and assess oral ...
15
RULES OF ORAL HYGIENE INDEX
1 Only fully erupted permanent teeth are
scored.
2 Third molars and incompletely erupted
te...
0 – No debris or stain
present
1 – Soft debris
covering
not more than 1/3rd the
tooth surface, or
presence
of extrinsic st...
17
SCORE CRITERIA
0 No calculus present
1 Supragingival calculus covering not more than 1/3 of
the exposed tooth surface
2...
CALCULATION
• Debris Index (DI) =( Buccal Score+ Lingual Score) / NO. OF SEG
• Calculus Index (CI) =( Buccal Score+ Lingua...
SIMPLIFIED ORAL HYGIENE INDEX
• Developed by John C Greene and Jack R Vermillion in 1964 as OHI was time
consuming and req...
20
16 17,18
11 21
26 27,28
36 37,38
31 41
46 47,48
Surfaces and tooth to
examined
Substitution
21
DI –S and CI-S
• Good -0.0-0.6
• Fair – 0.7-1.8
• Poor – 1.9 -3.0
OHI –S
•Good - 0.0-1.2
•Fair – 1.3- 3.0
•Poor – 3.0 -...
USES
• Widely used in epidemiological studies of periodontal diseases.
• Useful in evaluation of dental health education p...
PATIENT HYGIENE PERFORMANCE (PHP) INDEX
• Introduced by Podshadley A.G. and Haley JV in 1968.
• Assessments are based on 6...
• Apply a disclosing agent before scoring.
• Patient is asked to swish for 30 sec and then expectorate but not rinse.
• Ex...
• Debris score for individual tooth:
• Add the scores for each of the 5 subdivisions.
• PHP index for an individual= (Tota...
PLAQUE INDEX
• Silness and Loe in 1964
• Assesses only thickness of plaque at the cervical
margin of the tooth closest to ...
SCORING CRITERIA
Score Criteria
0 No Plaque
1
A film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin
and adjacent area of t...
CALCULATION
28
Plaque index for area 0-3 for each surface
Plaque index for a
tooth
Scores added and then divided by four
P...
USES
• Reliable technique for evaluating both mechanical anti plaque procedures and
chemical agents
• Used in longitudinal...
30
ADVANTAGE
•Good validity and reproducibility
•Can be used as full mouth or simplified
DRAWBACK
•Subjectivity in estimat...
Turesky, Gilmore, Glickman modification of the
Quigley-Hein plaque index
• Quigley and Hein in 1962 reported a plaque meas...
32
SCOR
E
CRITERIA
0 No plaque
1 Separate flecks of plaque at the cervical
margin of tooth
2 Thin continuous band of plaqu...
• Plaque is assessed on the labial, buccal and lingual surfaces of all the teeth after
using a disclosing agent.
• The sco...
O’LEARY INDEX
(plaque control record)
• O' leary T, Drake R, Naylor in1972
• Method of recording the presence of the plaqu...
Calculation
PLAQUE INDEX =The number of plaque containing surfaces
The total number of available surfaces
Since plaque is ...
BLEEDING POINT INDEX
• Provides an evaluation of gingival inflammation around
each tooth in patient’s mouth
• Bleeding on ...
GINGIVAL AND PERIODONTAL DISEASE INDICES
• GINGIVAL INDEX
• PERIODONTAL INDEX
• CPITN
• COMMUNITY PERIODONTAL INDEX
37
GINGIVAL INDEX
• Developed by Loe and Silness in 1963.
• One of the most widely accepted and used gingival indices.
• Asse...
:
• All surfaces of all teeth or selected teeth or selected surface of all teeth or selected
teeth are scored.
• The selec...
SCORE CRITERIA
0
Absence of inflammation/normal
gingiva
1
Mild inflammation, slight change
in color, slight edema, no
blee...
CALCULATION AND INTERPRETATION
• If the scores around each tooth are totaled
and divided by the number of surfaces per
too...
MODIFIED GINGIVAL INDEX
• Developed by Lobene, Weatherford, Ross, Lamm and Menaker in 1986.
• Assess the prevalence and se...
43
0
• Normal (absence of inflammation)
1
• Mild inflammation (slight change in color, little change in texture) of
any po...
RUSELL’S PERIODONTAL INDEX
• Developed by Rusell AI in 1956.
• It was once widely used in epidemiological surveys but not ...
• All the teeth are examined in this index.
• Russell chose the scoring values as 0,1,2,4,6,8 in order to relate the stage...
FIELD STUDIES CLINICAL STUDIES / RADIOGRAPHIC FINDINGS
0 Negative. Neither overt inflammation in the
investing tissues nor...
CALCULATION AND INTERPRETATION
• RPI score per person = Sum of individual scores
No of teeth present
47
Clinical Condition...
COMMUNITY PERIODONTAL INDEX OF TREATMENT NEEDS
• The community periodontal index of treatment needs (CPITN) was introduced...
The mouth is divided into sextants :
17- 14 13- 23 24- 27
47 – 44 43- 33 34 – 37
• The 3rd molars are not included, except...
Probing depth is recorded either on all the teeth in a sextant or only on certain
indexed teeth as recommended by who for...
For young people up to 19 yrs:
• Only 6 index teeth are examined : 16 11 26 46 31 36
• The second molars are excluded at ...
First described by WHO.
Designed for 2 purposes :
• measurement of pockets.
• detection of sub-gingival calculus.
Weighs :...
53
COD
E
CRITERIA TREATMENT
NEEDS
0 Healthy periodontium TN-0 No need of
treatment
1 Bleeding observed
during / after prob...
ADVANTAGE
• Simplicity
• Speed
• International uniformity
LIMITATIONS
• Doesnot record the position of
gingiva
• Doesn’t p...
COMMUNITY PERIODONTAL INDEX (CPI)
 Based on modification of CPITN
 Modification is done by including “loss of attachment...
56
Code Criteria
0 loss of attachment 0-3 mm, CEJ not visible
1 loss of attachment 4-5mm
2 loss of attachment 6-8mm
3 loss...
BY SCHOUR & MASSLER, (1944)
• To count number of gingival unit affected with gingivitis that is correlated
with severity o...
PAPILLARY COMPONENT (P)
• 0= NORMAL; NO INFLAMMATION.
• 1+= MILD PAPILLARY ENGORGEMENT; SLIGHT INCREASE IN SIZE.
• 2+= OBV...
MARGINAL COMPONENT(M)
• 0= Normal; no inflammation visible.
• 1+= Engorgement; slight increase in size; no bleeding.
• 2+=...
ATTACHED COMPONENT(A)
0= Normal; pale rose; stippled.
1+= slight engorgement with loss of stippling; change in color may o...
CALCULATION:
P M A INDEX SCORE PER PERSON = P +
M + A
61
USES:
On clinical trails
On individual patient
For epidemiolog...
• FIRST INTRODUCED BY RAMFJORD IN 1959
• COMPOSED OF THREE COMPONENTS:
I. PLAQUE COMPONENT,
II. CALCULUS COMPONENT AND
III...
PLAQUE COMPONENT:
Scoring is done after staining with Bismark Brown
solution.
Score Criteria
0 No plaque
1 Plaque present ...
Plaque Score = Total scores
No. of teeth examined
CALCULATION:
CALCULUS COMPONENT:
SCORING CRITERIA:
SCO
RE
CRITERIA
0 No calculus
1 Supragingival calculus extending only slightly below...
CALCULATION:
CALCULUS SCORE = TOTAL SCORES
NO. OF SURFACES EXAMINED
GINGIVAL AND PERIODONTAL COMPONENT.
• Gingival status is scored first.
• Gingival status and crevice depth is recorded in ...
68
SCORE CRITERIA
0 Absence of signs of inflammation
1 Mild to moderate inflammatory gingival changes not extending
around...
CALCULATION
PDI score = Total of individual tooth scores (PS+CS+GPS)
Number of tooth examined
70
RECENT ADVANCES IN PERIODONTAL
INDICES
• BASIC PERIODONTAL EXAMINATION (BPE) INDEX
• GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY INDEX FOR P...
• Developed by British Society of Periodontology in
1986
• Derived from the community periodontal index of
treatment needs...
72
• Genetic markers denote susceptibility toward disease manifestation
and it would be useful to exploit the information hid...
• Introduced in 1992 by American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) and
American Dental Association(ADA)
• Endorsed by the Wo...
CALCULATING PSR
• Highest score in a sextant is recorded as the PSR score for
the sextant.
• Only one score is recorded fo...
ADVANTAGES
• Introducing a simplified screening method that met
legal dental recording requirements.
• Early detection of ...
LIMITATIONS
• Limited use of the PSR system in children due to
inability to differentiate pseudo-pockets
• Does not measur...
• Used to measure pocket depths.
• A pocket measuring probe/ Williams probe is used.
• Main components to record:
- Pocket...
• Two blunt instruments are used to asses a tooth’s mobility.
e.g end of mirror and probe
• To quantify mobility, Millers ...
• The furcation is the point at which the two roots divide.
• A pocket measuring probe is used (naber’s probe)
Ramfjord an...
RECESSION
•To measure the recession of a individual
tooth, a pocket measuring probe must
be used.
•The probe is placed ont...
• THE POCKET MEASURING PROBE IS INSERTED INTO THE
GINGIVAL CREVICE.
• THE DISTANCE FROM THE BASE OF THE POCKET AND THE
GIN...
• The DPC allows the operator to find sites in the mouth requiring
attention.
• Sites with pockets greater than 5mm will r...
84
Dental diseases are the most prevalent and most neglected of all the
chronic diseases of mankind.
One of the major prob...
REFERENCES
• Essentials of Public health dentistry 5E, Soben Peter
• Carranza's Clinical Periodontology, 12E (2015) , Newm...
THANK YOU
86
Prochain SlideShare
Chargement dans…5
×

sur

Periodontal indices final Slide 1 Periodontal indices final Slide 2 Periodontal indices final Slide 3 Periodontal indices final Slide 4 Periodontal indices final Slide 5 Periodontal indices final Slide 6 Periodontal indices final Slide 7 Periodontal indices final Slide 8 Periodontal indices final Slide 9 Periodontal indices final Slide 10 Periodontal indices final Slide 11 Periodontal indices final Slide 12 Periodontal indices final Slide 13 Periodontal indices final Slide 14 Periodontal indices final Slide 15 Periodontal indices final Slide 16 Periodontal indices final Slide 17 Periodontal indices final Slide 18 Periodontal indices final Slide 19 Periodontal indices final Slide 20 Periodontal indices final Slide 21 Periodontal indices final Slide 22 Periodontal indices final Slide 23 Periodontal indices final Slide 24 Periodontal indices final Slide 25 Periodontal indices final Slide 26 Periodontal indices final Slide 27 Periodontal indices final Slide 28 Periodontal indices final Slide 29 Periodontal indices final Slide 30 Periodontal indices final Slide 31 Periodontal indices final Slide 32 Periodontal indices final Slide 33 Periodontal indices final Slide 34 Periodontal indices final Slide 35 Periodontal indices final Slide 36 Periodontal indices final Slide 37 Periodontal indices final Slide 38 Periodontal indices final Slide 39 Periodontal indices final Slide 40 Periodontal indices final Slide 41 Periodontal indices final Slide 42 Periodontal indices final Slide 43 Periodontal indices final Slide 44 Periodontal indices final Slide 45 Periodontal indices final Slide 46 Periodontal indices final Slide 47 Periodontal indices final Slide 48 Periodontal indices final Slide 49 Periodontal indices final Slide 50 Periodontal indices final Slide 51 Periodontal indices final Slide 52 Periodontal indices final Slide 53 Periodontal indices final Slide 54 Periodontal indices final Slide 55 Periodontal indices final Slide 56 Periodontal indices final Slide 57 Periodontal indices final Slide 58 Periodontal indices final Slide 59 Periodontal indices final Slide 60 Periodontal indices final Slide 61 Periodontal indices final Slide 62 Periodontal indices final Slide 63 Periodontal indices final Slide 64 Periodontal indices final Slide 65 Periodontal indices final Slide 66 Periodontal indices final Slide 67 Periodontal indices final Slide 68 Periodontal indices final Slide 69 Periodontal indices final Slide 70 Periodontal indices final Slide 71 Periodontal indices final Slide 72 Periodontal indices final Slide 73 Periodontal indices final Slide 74 Periodontal indices final Slide 75 Periodontal indices final Slide 76 Periodontal indices final Slide 77 Periodontal indices final Slide 78 Periodontal indices final Slide 79 Periodontal indices final Slide 80 Periodontal indices final Slide 81 Periodontal indices final Slide 82 Periodontal indices final Slide 83 Periodontal indices final Slide 84 Periodontal indices final Slide 85 Periodontal indices final Slide 86
Prochain SlideShare
Local anaesthesia- composition and dosage in dentistry
Suivant
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne et voir en mode plein écran

114 j’aime

Partager

Télécharger pour lire hors ligne

Periodontal indices final

Télécharger pour lire hors ligne

INDEX IN DENTISTRY

Livres associés

Gratuit avec un essai de 30 jours de Scribd

Tout voir

Periodontal indices final

  1. 1. GOOD MORNING 1
  2. 2. 2 SUBMITTED BY: SHEKHAR KUMAR MANDAL Roll no: 26 BDS IV GUIDED BY: DR. NAVRAJ LAMDARI DR. LAL BABU KAMAIT DEPARTMENT OF PERIODONTICS COLLEGE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, BHARATPUR NEPAL
  3. 3. CONTENTS REFERENCES CONCLUSION RECENT ADVANCES IN PERIODONTAL INDICES GINGIVAL AND PERIODONTAL DISEASE INDICES ORAL HYGIENE AND PLAQUE INDEX OBJECTIVES AND USES OF INDEX IDEAL REQUISITES OF AN INDEX CLASSIFICATION OF INDEX DEFINITIONS INTRODUCTION 3
  4. 4. INTRODUCTION “UNLESS YOU CAN COUNT IT, WEIGH IT OR EXPRESS IT IN A QUANTITATIVE FASHION, YOU HAVE SCARCELY BEGUN TO THINK ABOUT THE DISEASE IN A SCIENTIFIC FASHION” -LORD KELVIN 4
  5. 5. DEFINITIONS • “Epidemiological indices are attempts to quantitate clinical condition on graduated scale, thereby facilitating comparison among populations examined by the same criteria and methods”. – Irving Glickman 5 According to Russell A.L , an index is defined as ‘A numerical value describing the relative status of the population on a graduated scale with definite upper and lower limits which is designed to permit and facilitate comparison with other population classified with the same criteria and the method”
  6. 6. “An index is an expression of clinical observation in numeric values. It is used to describe the status of the individual or group with respect to a condition being measured. The use of numeric scale and a standardized method for interpreting observations of a condition results in an index score that is more consistent and less subjective than a word description of that condition”. – Esther M Wilkins 6
  7. 7. IDEAL REQUISITES OF AN INDEX 7
  8. 8. OBJECTIVES FOR INDIVIDUAL PATIENT • Recognize an oral problem • Effectiveness of present oral hygiene practices • Motivation in preventive and professional care for control and elimination of diseases 8 IN RESEARCH • Determine base line data before experimental factors are introduced • Measure the effectiveness of specific agents for prevention control or treatment of oral condition IN COMMUNITY • Shows prevalence and incidence of a condition • Assess the need of the community • Compare the effects of a community program and evaluate the results
  9. 9. Based on the direction in which their scores can fluctuate: • Measures condition that can be changed e.g. periodontal index Reversible index: • Measures conditions that will not change e.g. dental caries Irreversible index: 9 CLASSIFICATION OF INDEX
  10. 10. •Depending upon the extent to which areas of oral cavity are measured : Full mouth indices: • Patient’s entire periodontium or dentition is measured. • e.g. OHI Simplified indices: • Measure only a representative sample of the dental apparatus. • e.g. OHI-S 10
  11. 11. According to the entity which they measure • “d” decay portion of the dmf index is the best example of disease index Disease index : • Measuring gingival or sulcular bleeding are essentially examples of symptom indices Symptom index : • “f” filled portion of dmft index is the best example for treatment index Treatment index : 11
  12. 12. General indices : • index that measures the presence or absence of a condition. e.g. plaque index Simple index: • index that measures all the evidence of a condition, past and present. e.g. dmf index Cumulative index: 12
  13. 13. INDICES USED FOR ORAL HYGIENE ASSESSMENT • Oral hygiene index • Simplified oral hygiene index • Patient hygiene performance • Turesky, Gilmore, Glickman modification of the Quigley Hein plaque index 13
  14. 14. ORAL HYGIENE INDEX (OHI) • Developed in 1960 by John C. Green and Jack R. Vermillion in order to classify and assess oral hygiene status. • Simple and sensitive method for assessing group or individual oral hygiene quantitatively. • Composed of 2 components: • Debris index (DI) • Calculus index (CI) 14
  15. 15. 15 RULES OF ORAL HYGIENE INDEX 1 Only fully erupted permanent teeth are scored. 2 Third molars and incompletely erupted teeth are not scored because of the wide variations in heights of clinical crowns. 3 The buccal and lingual debris scores are both taken on the tooth in a segment having the greatest surface area covered by debris. 4 The buccal and lingual calculus scores are both taken on the tooth in a segment having the greatest surface area covered by supragingival and subgingival calculus.
  16. 16. 0 – No debris or stain present 1 – Soft debris covering not more than 1/3rd the tooth surface, or presence of extrinsic stains without other debris regardless of the area covered 2 – Soft debris covering more than 1/3rd, but not more than 2/3rd,of the exposed tooth surface 3 – Soft debris covering more than 2/3rd of the exposed DEBRIS INDEX CRITERIA
  17. 17. 17 SCORE CRITERIA 0 No calculus present 1 Supragingival calculus covering not more than 1/3 of the exposed tooth surface 2 Supragingival calculus covering more than 1/3 but not more than 2/3 the exposed tooth surface or presence of individual flecks of subgingival calculus around the cervical portion of the tooth or both. 3 Supragingival calculus covering more than 2/3 the exposed tooth surface or a continuous heavy band of subgingival calculus around the cervical portion of tooth or both. Supragingival calculus Subgingival calculus CALCULUS INDEX CRITERIA
  18. 18. CALCULATION • Debris Index (DI) =( Buccal Score+ Lingual Score) / NO. OF SEG • Calculus Index (CI) =( Buccal Score+ Lingual Score) / NO. OF SEG • Oral Hygiene Index= DI+CI • DI and CI range from 0-6 • Maximum score for all segments can be 36 for debris or calculus • OHI range from 0-12 • Higher the OHI, poorer is the oral hygiene of patient 18
  19. 19. SIMPLIFIED ORAL HYGIENE INDEX • Developed by John C Greene and Jack R Vermillion in 1964 as OHI was time consuming and required more decision making • Only fully erupted permanent teeth are scored • Natural teeth with full crown restorations and surfaces reduced in height by caries or trauma are not scored • An alternate tooth is then examined if missing 19
  20. 20. 20 16 17,18 11 21 26 27,28 36 37,38 31 41 46 47,48 Surfaces and tooth to examined Substitution
  21. 21. 21 DI –S and CI-S • Good -0.0-0.6 • Fair – 0.7-1.8 • Poor – 1.9 -3.0 OHI –S •Good - 0.0-1.2 •Fair – 1.3- 3.0 •Poor – 3.0 -6.0 INTERPRETATIONCALCULATION • DI –S = Total score/No of surfaces • CI-S = Total score/ No of surfaces • OHI -S= DI-S+ CI-S
  22. 22. USES • Widely used in epidemiological studies of periodontal diseases. • Useful in evaluation of dental health education programs • Evaluating the efficacy of tooth brushes. • Evaluate an individual’s level of oral cleanliness.
  23. 23. PATIENT HYGIENE PERFORMANCE (PHP) INDEX • Introduced by Podshadley A.G. and Haley JV in 1968. • Assessments are based on 6 index teeth. • The extent of plaque and debris over a tooth surface was determined. 23 16 Buccal 11 Labial 26 Buccal 36 Lingual 31 Labial 46 Lingual
  24. 24. • Apply a disclosing agent before scoring. • Patient is asked to swish for 30 sec and then expectorate but not rinse. • Examination is made by using a mouth mirror. • Each of the 5 subdivisions is scored for presence of stained debris: 0= No debris(or questionable) 1= Debris definitely present. 24 M MI D M O/I G Procedure:
  25. 25. • Debris score for individual tooth: • Add the scores for each of the 5 subdivisions. • PHP index for an individual= (Total score for all the teeth /the number of teeth examined) Debris score for 1 tooth = 4/5 = 0.8 1 1 1 1 0 Rating scores Excellent : 0 (no debris) Good : 0.1-1.7 Fair : 1.8 – 3.4 Poor : 3.5 – 5.0
  26. 26. PLAQUE INDEX • Silness and Loe in 1964 • Assesses only thickness of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth closest to the gums • All four surfaces are examined • Distal • Mesial • Lingual • Buccal 12 24 16 44 32 36
  27. 27. SCORING CRITERIA Score Criteria 0 No Plaque 1 A film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin and adjacent area of tooth the plaque may be seen in situ only after application of disclosing solution or by using probe on tooth surface 2 Moderate accumulation of soft deposits within the gingival pocket, or the tooth and gingival margin which can be seen with the naked eye 3 Abundance of soft matter within the gingival pocket and/or on the tooth and gingival margin 27
  28. 28. CALCULATION 28 Plaque index for area 0-3 for each surface Plaque index for a tooth Scores added and then divided by four Plaque index for group of teeth Scores for individual teeth are added and then divided by number of teeth. Plaque index for the individual Indices for each of the teeth are added and then divided by the total number of teeth examined Plaque index for group All indices are taken and divided by number of individual Rating Scores Excellent 0 Good 0.1-0.9 Fair 1.0-1.9 Poor 2.0-3.0 INTERPRETATION
  29. 29. USES • Reliable technique for evaluating both mechanical anti plaque procedures and chemical agents • Used in longitudinal studies and clinical trials 29
  30. 30. 30 ADVANTAGE •Good validity and reproducibility •Can be used as full mouth or simplified DRAWBACK •Subjectivity in estimating plaque
  31. 31. Turesky, Gilmore, Glickman modification of the Quigley-Hein plaque index • Quigley and Hein in 1962 reported a plaque measurement that focused on the gingival third of the tooth surface. • Only facial surfaces of the anterior teeth were examined after using basic fuchsin mouthwash as a disclosing agent. • Quigley - Hein plaque index was modified by Turesky, Gilmore and Glickman in 1970. 31
  32. 32. 32 SCOR E CRITERIA 0 No plaque 1 Separate flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of tooth 2 Thin continuous band of plaque ( up to 1 mm 3 Band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3rd of the crown of the tooth. 4 Plaque covering at least 1/3rd but less than 2/3rd of the crown of the tooth 5 Plaque covering 2/3rd or more of the crown of the tooth
  33. 33. • Plaque is assessed on the labial, buccal and lingual surfaces of all the teeth after using a disclosing agent. • The scores of the gingival 1/3rd area was also redefined. • Provides a comprehensive method for evaluating anti plaque procedures such as tooth brushing, flossing as well as chemical anti plaque agents. • The index is based on a numerical score of 0 to 5 33
  34. 34. O’LEARY INDEX (plaque control record) • O' leary T, Drake R, Naylor in1972 • Method of recording the presence of the plaque on individual tooth surfaces • Suitable disclosing solution such as Bismarck brown, Diaplac or similar is painted on all exposed tooth surfaces.. • The operator (using an explorer or a tip of a probe) examines each stained surface for soft accumulations at the dentogingival junction. When found, they are recorded by making a dash/red colour in the appropriate spaces on the record form
  35. 35. Calculation PLAQUE INDEX =The number of plaque containing surfaces The total number of available surfaces Since plaque is stained ,identification and record making is easy Also aids in patient education Drawback Records only the presence or absence of plaque
  36. 36. BLEEDING POINT INDEX • Provides an evaluation of gingival inflammation around each tooth in patient’s mouth • Bleeding on probing recorded on distal ,facial ,mesial and gingival surface • Calculation=(no of bleeding surface/total no of tooth surface)*100 • Demonstrates gingival inflammation characterized by gingival bleeding rather than presence of microbial plaque
  37. 37. GINGIVAL AND PERIODONTAL DISEASE INDICES • GINGIVAL INDEX • PERIODONTAL INDEX • CPITN • COMMUNITY PERIODONTAL INDEX 37
  38. 38. GINGIVAL INDEX • Developed by Loe and Silness in 1963. • One of the most widely accepted and used gingival indices. • Assess the severity of gingivitis and its location in 4 possible areas. • Mesial • Lingual • Distal • Facial • 0nly qualitative changes are assessed. 38
  39. 39. : • All surfaces of all teeth or selected teeth or selected surface of all teeth or selected teeth are scored. • The selected teeth as the index teeth are 16,12,24,36,32,44. • The teeth and gingiva are first dried with a blast of air and/or cotton rolls. • The tissues are divided into 4 gingival scoring units: Disto facial papilla, Facial margin, Mesio facial papilla and Entire lingual margin. • A blunt periodontal probe is used to assess the bleeding potential of the tissues. 39 METHOD
  40. 40. SCORE CRITERIA 0 Absence of inflammation/normal gingiva 1 Mild inflammation, slight change in color, slight edema, no bleeding on probing 2 Moderate inflammation, moderate glazing, redness, edema and hypertrophy. bleeding on probing 3 Severe inflammation, marked redness and hypertrophy ulceration. Tendency to spontaneous bleeding. 40
  41. 41. CALCULATION AND INTERPRETATION • If the scores around each tooth are totaled and divided by the number of surfaces per tooth examined (4), the gingival index score for the tooth is obtained. • Totaling all of the scores per tooth and dividing by the number of teeth examined provides the gingival index score for individual. 41 INTERPRETATION: 0.1 - 1.0 : mild gingivitis 1.1 – 2.0 : moderate gingivitis 2.1 – 3.0 : severe gingivitis
  42. 42. MODIFIED GINGIVAL INDEX • Developed by Lobene, Weatherford, Ross, Lamm and Menaker in 1986. • Assess the prevalence and severity of gingivitis. • Strictly based on non invasive approach i.e. visual examination only without any probing. • To obtain MGI , labial and lingual surfaces of the gingival margins and the interdental papilla of all erupted teeth except 3rd molars are examined and scored. 42
  43. 43. 43 0 • Normal (absence of inflammation) 1 • Mild inflammation (slight change in color, little change in texture) of any portion of the gingival unit 2 • Mild inflammation of the entire gingival unit 3 • Moderate inflammation (moderate glazing, redness, edema, and/or hypertrophy) of the gingival unit. 4 • Severe inflammation (marked redness and edema/hypertrophy, spontaneous bleeding, or ulceration) of the gingival unit. SCORE CRITERIA
  44. 44. RUSELL’S PERIODONTAL INDEX • Developed by Rusell AI in 1956. • It was once widely used in epidemiological surveys but not used much now because of introduction of new periodontal indices and refinement of criteria. • The RPI is reported to be useful among large populations, but it is of limited use for individuals or small groups. 44
  45. 45. • All the teeth are examined in this index. • Russell chose the scoring values as 0,1,2,4,6,8 in order to relate the stage of the disease in an epidemiological survey to the clinical conditions observed. • The Russell’s rule states that “ when in doubt assign the lower score.” 45 METHOD
  46. 46. FIELD STUDIES CLINICAL STUDIES / RADIOGRAPHIC FINDINGS 0 Negative. Neither overt inflammation in the investing tissues nor loss of function due to destruction of supporting bone. Radiographic appearance is essentially normal. 1 Mild gingivitis. An overt area of inflammation in the free gingiva does not circumscribe the tooth 2 Gingivitis. Inflammation completely circumscribe the tooth, but there is no apparent break in the epithelial attachment 4 Used only when radiographs are available. There is early notch like resorption of alveolar crest. 6 Gingivitis with pocket formation. The epithelial attachment is broken and there is a pocket. There is no interference with normal masticatory function; the tooth is firm in its socket and has not drifted. There is horizontal bone loss involving the entire alveolar crest, up to half of the length of the tooth root. 8 Advanced destruction with loss of masticatory function. The tooth may be loose, may have drifted, may sound dull on percussion with metallic instrument, or may be depressible in its socket. There is advanced bone loss involving more than half of the tooth root, or a definite intrabony pocket with widening of periodontal ligament. There may be root resorption or rarefaction at the apex. 46
  47. 47. CALCULATION AND INTERPRETATION • RPI score per person = Sum of individual scores No of teeth present 47 Clinical Condition Individual Scores Clinical normally supportive tissue 0.0-0.2 Simple gingivitis 0.3-0.9 Beginning destructive periodontal diseases 1.0-1.9 Established destructive periodontal disease 2.0-4.9 Terminal disease 5.0-8.0
  48. 48. COMMUNITY PERIODONTAL INDEX OF TREATMENT NEEDS • The community periodontal index of treatment needs (CPITN) was introduced by JUKKAAINAMO for joint working committee of the WHO and FDI in 1982. • Developed primarily to survey and evaluate periodontal treatment needs rather than determining past and present periodontal status i.e. recession of the gingival margin and alveolar bone. • Treatment needs implies that the CPITN assesses only those conditions potentially responsive to treatment, but not non treatable or irreversible conditions. 48
  49. 49. The mouth is divided into sextants : 17- 14 13- 23 24- 27 47 – 44 43- 33 34 – 37 • The 3rd molars are not included, except where they are functioning in place of 2nd molars. • The treatment need in a sextant is recorded only if there are 2 or more teeth present in a sextant and not indicated for extraction. • If only one tooth remains in a sextant, then the tooth is included in the adjoining sextant. 49 Procedure :
  50. 50. Probing depth is recorded either on all the teeth in a sextant or only on certain indexed teeth as recommended by who for epidemiological surveys. For adults aged > 20 yrs: • 10 index teeth are taken into account :17 16 11 26 37 47 46 31 36 37. • The molars are examined in pairs and only one score the highest score is recorded. 50
  51. 51. For young people up to 19 yrs: • Only 6 index teeth are examined : 16 11 26 46 31 36 • The second molars are excluded at these ages because of the high frequency of false pockets (non inflammatory tooth eruption associated). • When examining children less than 15 yrs, pockets are not recorded although probing for bleeding and calculus are carried out as a routine. 51
  52. 52. First described by WHO. Designed for 2 purposes : • measurement of pockets. • detection of sub-gingival calculus. Weighs : 5 gms Working force: 20-25 gms 52 CPITN probe CPITN-E PROBE CPITN-C PROBE
  53. 53. 53 COD E CRITERIA TREATMENT NEEDS 0 Healthy periodontium TN-0 No need of treatment 1 Bleeding observed during / after probing TN-1 Self care 2 Calculus or other plaque retentive factors seen or felt during probing TN-2 Professional care 3 Pathological pocket 4-5 mm. gingival margin situated on black band of the probe. TN-2 Scaling and root planning 4 Pathological pocket 6mm or more. Black band of the probe not visible TN-3 Complex therapy by specially trained personnel
  54. 54. ADVANTAGE • Simplicity • Speed • International uniformity LIMITATIONS • Doesnot record the position of gingiva • Doesn’t provide assessment of past periodontal breakdown 54
  55. 55. COMMUNITY PERIODONTAL INDEX (CPI)  Based on modification of CPITN  Modification is done by including “loss of attachment” and eliminating “treatment needs” category.  CPI scoring criteria is same as CPITN and done with CPITN-C probe
  56. 56. 56 Code Criteria 0 loss of attachment 0-3 mm, CEJ not visible 1 loss of attachment 4-5mm 2 loss of attachment 6-8mm 3 loss of attachment 9-11mm 4 loss of attachment 12mm or more X excluded sextant 9 not recorded Codes and Criteria for Loss of attachment includes:
  57. 57. BY SCHOUR & MASSLER, (1944) • To count number of gingival unit affected with gingivitis that is correlated with severity of gingival inflammation. • The facial surface of gingiva around a tooth divided into three units: Papillary gingiva (P), Marginal gingiva (M), and Attached gingiva (A). • Usually central incisor to second premolars are examined. PAPILLARY MARGINAL ATTACHMENT INDEX(PM
  58. 58. PAPILLARY COMPONENT (P) • 0= NORMAL; NO INFLAMMATION. • 1+= MILD PAPILLARY ENGORGEMENT; SLIGHT INCREASE IN SIZE. • 2+= OBVIOUS INCREASE IN SIZE OF GINGIVAL PAPILLA; HEMORRHAGE ON PRESSURE. • 3+= EXCESSIVE INCREASE IN SIZE WITH SPONTANEOUS HEMORRHAGE. • 4+= NECROTIC PAPILLA. • 5+= ATROPHY AND LOSS OF PAPILLA (THROUGH INFLAMMATION).
  59. 59. MARGINAL COMPONENT(M) • 0= Normal; no inflammation visible. • 1+= Engorgement; slight increase in size; no bleeding. • 2+= Obvious engorgement; bleeding upon pressure. • 3+= Swollen collar; spontaneous hemorrhage; beginning infiltration into attached gingivae. • 4+= Necrotic gingivitis. • 5+= Recession of the free marginal gingiva below the CEJ due to inflammatory changes.
  60. 60. ATTACHED COMPONENT(A) 0= Normal; pale rose; stippled. 1+= slight engorgement with loss of stippling; change in color may or may not be present. 2+=obvious engorgement of attached gingivae with marked increase in redness. Pocket formation present. 3+=advanced periodontitis. Deep pockets evident.
  61. 61. CALCULATION: P M A INDEX SCORE PER PERSON = P + M + A 61 USES: On clinical trails On individual patient For epidemiological surveys
  62. 62. • FIRST INTRODUCED BY RAMFJORD IN 1959 • COMPOSED OF THREE COMPONENTS: I. PLAQUE COMPONENT, II. CALCULUS COMPONENT AND III. GINGIVAL & PERIODONTAL COMPONENET. • ALL THE THREE COMPONENTS WILL BE SCORED SEPARATELY USING SIX RAMFJORD SELECTED TEETH. 16 21 24 44 41 36 PERIODONTAL DISEASE INDEX (PDI)
  63. 63. PLAQUE COMPONENT: Scoring is done after staining with Bismark Brown solution. Score Criteria 0 No plaque 1 Plaque present on some but not on all interproximal, buccal, and lingual surfaces of the tooth 2 Plaque present on all interproximal, buccal, and lingual surfaces,but covering less than one half of these surfaces 3 Plaque extending over all interproximal, buccal and lingual surfaces, and covering more than one half of these surfaces
  64. 64. Plaque Score = Total scores No. of teeth examined CALCULATION:
  65. 65. CALCULUS COMPONENT: SCORING CRITERIA: SCO RE CRITERIA 0 No calculus 1 Supragingival calculus extending only slightly below the free gingival margin (not more than 1 mm 2 Moderate amount of supragingival and sub gingival calculus or sub- gingival calculus alone. 3 An abundance of supra gingival and sub gingival calculus
  66. 66. CALCULATION: CALCULUS SCORE = TOTAL SCORES NO. OF SURFACES EXAMINED
  67. 67. GINGIVAL AND PERIODONTAL COMPONENT. • Gingival status is scored first. • Gingival status and crevice depth is recorded in relation to CEJ • All areas (m, d, b, l) is scored . • Only fully erupted teeth are scored . • There is no substitution for excluded teeth.
  68. 68. 68 SCORE CRITERIA 0 Absence of signs of inflammation 1 Mild to moderate inflammatory gingival changes not extending around the tooth 2 Mild to moderately severe gingivitis extending all around the tooth 3 severe gingivitis characterized by marked redness, swelling, tendency to bleed, and ulceration 4 gingival crevice in any of 4 measured areas(M,D,B,L) extending apically to CEJ but not more than 3mm 5 gingival crevice in any of 4 measured areas(M,D,B,L) extending apically to CEJ between 3-6mm 6 gingival crevice in any of 4 measured areas(M,D,B,L) extending apically more than 6mm from CEJ
  69. 69. CALCULATION PDI score = Total of individual tooth scores (PS+CS+GPS) Number of tooth examined
  70. 70. 70 RECENT ADVANCES IN PERIODONTAL INDICES • BASIC PERIODONTAL EXAMINATION (BPE) INDEX • GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY INDEX FOR PERIODONTAL DISEAS • PERIODONTAL SCREENING AND RECORDING (PSR) INDEX
  71. 71. • Developed by British Society of Periodontology in 1986 • Derived from the community periodontal index of treatment needs (cpitn) • Simple and rapid screening tool that is used to indicate the level of examination needed and to provide basic guidance on treatment need • Not a diagnostic tool 71 BASIC PERIODONTAL EXAMINATION (BPE) INDEX
  72. 72. 72
  73. 73. • Genetic markers denote susceptibility toward disease manifestation and it would be useful to exploit the information hidden into them and to derive a Genetic Susceptibility Index (GSI) • Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP’s) in genes encoding molecules of the host defense system are assessed and an association is established between SNP and disease status 73 GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY INDEX FOR PERIODONTAL DISEASE
  74. 74. • Introduced in 1992 by American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) and American Dental Association(ADA) • Endorsed by the World Health Organization (WHO) • Adaptation of the Community Periodontal Index of Treatment needs (CPITN) • Used to measure gingival bleeding upon probing, calculus on a tooth, and periodontal pocket depth in each sextant of the oral cavity 74 PERIODONTAL SCREENING AND RECORDING (PSR) INDEX
  75. 75. CALCULATING PSR • Highest score in a sextant is recorded as the PSR score for the sextant. • Only one score is recorded for each sextant of the oral cavity. • A WHO/CPITN/PSR probe is used to examine each tooth individually 75
  76. 76. ADVANTAGES • Introducing a simplified screening method that met legal dental recording requirements. • Early detection of periodontal disease and it serves as an aid in monitoring the periodontal status of patients 76
  77. 77. LIMITATIONS • Limited use of the PSR system in children due to inability to differentiate pseudo-pockets • Does not measure epithelial attachment, the severity of periodontal disease may be underestimated with its use 77
  78. 78. • Used to measure pocket depths. • A pocket measuring probe/ Williams probe is used. • Main components to record: - Pocket depth (mm) - Mobility - Recession (mm) - Bleeding on probing - Furcation DPC – DETAILED PERIODONTAL CHART
  79. 79. • Two blunt instruments are used to asses a tooth’s mobility. e.g end of mirror and probe • To quantify mobility, Millers index of mobility is used: MOBILITY GRADE MOBILITY Grade 0 Normal physiological mobility (<1mm) Grade 1 Movement up to 1mm in horizontal plane Grade 2 Movement greater than 1mm in horizontal plane Grade 4 Severe mobility greater than 2mm or vertical mobility
  80. 80. • The furcation is the point at which the two roots divide. • A pocket measuring probe is used (naber’s probe) Ramfjord and Ash furcation index: FURCATION GRADE MOBILITY Grade 0 No clinical furcation involved Grade 1 Bone loss up to 1/3 width Grade 2 Bone loss up to 2/3 width Grade 4 Through and through defect
  81. 81. RECESSION •To measure the recession of a individual tooth, a pocket measuring probe must be used. •The probe is placed onto the tooth and the distance between the cemento- enamel junction and the gingival margin is measured. This is the amount of recession that has occurred on that tooth.
  82. 82. • THE POCKET MEASURING PROBE IS INSERTED INTO THE GINGIVAL CREVICE. • THE DISTANCE FROM THE BASE OF THE POCKET AND THE GINGIVAL MARGIN IS MEASURED. • IN ADDITION, IF THE SITE BLEEDS ON PROBING, CIRCLE THE SCORE IN RED AND IF THE SITE HAS SUPPURATION (PUS) CIRCLE THE SCORE IN BLUE OR BLACK. BASELINE POCKET DEPTH BASELINE POCKET DEPTH + RECESSION = CAL
  83. 83. • The DPC allows the operator to find sites in the mouth requiring attention. • Sites with pockets greater than 5mm will require RSD. • Subsequent pocket depths and cal can be measured after treatment to assess the success of treatment. WHAT HAPPENS FROM THE RESULTS OF THE DPC??
  84. 84. 84 Dental diseases are the most prevalent and most neglected of all the chronic diseases of mankind. One of the major problems in studying dental diseases and its factors is the development of a suitable and practicable method for recording and classifying the occurrence and severity of the disease. Dental indices and scoring methods are used in clinical practice and community programs to determine and recoRd the state of health of individual and group CONCLUSION
  85. 85. REFERENCES • Essentials of Public health dentistry 5E, Soben Peter • Carranza's Clinical Periodontology, 12E (2015) , Newman, Takei, Klokkevold, Carranza • Https://www.mah.se/capp/methods-and-indices/oral-hygiene- indices/simplified-oral-hygiene-index--ohi-s/ • Dhingra k, vandana k l; indices for measuring periodontitis: a literature review. international dental journal. 2011; 85
  86. 86. THANK YOU 86
  • SudiptaBera9

    Oct. 20, 2021
  • DrArdraMP

    Sep. 4, 2021
  • arpeetkrantikar

    Aug. 17, 2021
  • SonaRani7

    Aug. 9, 2021
  • manasasriram1

    Jul. 23, 2021
  • SahithiGarapati

    Jul. 22, 2021
  • BharghaviPatnaik

    Jul. 19, 2021
  • snehithareddy14

    Jun. 28, 2021
  • KhadijaBizgarn

    Apr. 28, 2021
  • AhmadSerhan7

    Apr. 24, 2021
  • drjaffarraza

    Apr. 8, 2021
  • Mubijiva20

    Jan. 31, 2021
  • SharanendraSwamy

    Jan. 23, 2021
  • mudasirgani

    Jan. 18, 2021
  • MussabTariq2

    Dec. 22, 2020
  • dannyaryna

    Nov. 30, 2020
  • SadiaKhalil5

    Nov. 9, 2020
  • PragnaValiya

    Sep. 4, 2020
  • Geetha62

    Aug. 27, 2020
  • KrishaKadakia

    Aug. 17, 2020

INDEX IN DENTISTRY

Vues

Nombre de vues

34 948

Sur Slideshare

0

À partir des intégrations

0

Nombre d'intégrations

23

Actions

Téléchargements

1 089

Partages

0

Commentaires

0

Mentions J'aime

114

×