1.Commentary on "Reliability of two different presurgical preparation methods for implant dentistry based on panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in cadavers".
Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science 2012;42(4):144-144
No abstract available.
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
;
Dentistry
;
Radiography, Panoramic
4.Sphincter of Oddi Manometry: Methodological Issues in Reproducibility of Measurements.
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2016;22(3):541-541
No abstract available.
Manometry*
;
Sphincter of Oddi*
5.Sphincter of Oddi Manometry: Methodological Issues in Reproducibility of Measurements.
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2016;22(3):541-541
No abstract available.
Manometry*
;
Sphincter of Oddi*
6.Comparison of the reproducibility of results of a new peri-implantitis assessment system (implant success index) with the Misch classification.
Mohammad Reza ABRISHAMI ; Siamak SABOUR ; Maryam NASIRI ; Reza AMID ; Mahdi KADKHODAZADEH
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2014;40(2):61-67
OBJECTIVES: The present study was conducted to determine the reproducibility of peri-implant tissue assessment using the new implant success index (ISI) in comparison with the Misch classification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this descriptive study, 22 cases of peri-implant soft tissue with different conditions were selected, and color slides were prepared from them. The slides were shown to periodontists, maxillofacial surgeons, prosthodontists and general dentists, and these professionals were asked to score the images according to the Misch classification and ISI. The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility scores of the viewers were assessed and reported using kappa and weighted kappa (WK) tests. RESULTS: Inter-observer reproducibility of the ISI technique between the prosthodontists-periodontists (WK=0.85), prosthodontists-maxillofacial surgeons (WK=0.86) and periodontists-maxillofacial surgeons (WK=0.9) was better than that between general dentists and other specialists. In the two groups of general dentists and maxillofacial surgeons, ISI was more reproducible than the Misch classification system (WK=0.99 versus WK non-calculable, WK=1 and WK=0.86). The intra-observer reproducibility of both methods was equally excellent among periodontists (WK=1). For prosthodontists, the WK was not calculable via any of the methods. CONCLUSION: The intra-observer reproducibility of both the ISI and Misch classification techniques depends on the specialty and expertise of the clinician. Although ISI has more classes, it also has higher reproducibility than simpler classifications due to its ability to provide more detail.
Classification*
;
Dentists
;
Humans
;
Peri-Implantitis*
;
Reproducibility of Results*
;
Specialization
Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail