Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug:52 Suppl 29:58-73.
doi: 10.1111/jcpe.14145. Epub 2025 Mar 17.

Methods for Clinical Assessment in Periodontal Diagnostics: A Systematic Review

I H Stødle  1 , J-C Imber  2 , S V Shanbhag  1 , G E Salvi  2 , A Verket  1 , A Stähli  2
Affiliations

Methods for Clinical Assessment in Periodontal Diagnostics: A Systematic Review

I H Stødle et al. J Clin Periodontol. 2025 Aug.

Abstract

Aim: This systematic review aimed to answer the following PECOS questions: In human subjects with untreated periodontitis (Q1) or enrolled in supportive periodontal care (SPC) (Q2) (P), are there clinical assessment methods (E) other than the contemporary manual probe (C) that increase diagnostic accuracy or reliability when examining/screening for periodontitis (Q1) or when monitoring disease stability or progression (Q2) (O) as demonstrated in clinical studies (S)?

Material and methods: A single search strategy was devised to identify relevant studies addressing Q1 and Q2 from four electronic databases. The main clinical parameters considered were probing depth (PD) and clinical attachment level (CAL). Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Results: Of the 5417 identified titles, 26 studies were finally included. The evidence revealed that manual probes generally yielded higher PD values, while pressure-sensitive/electronic probes demonstrated a trend for higher inter- and intra-examiner reproducibility. No clear trend for the superiority of one probe over the other could be identified for Q1 or Q2.

Conclusions: The outcomes of the present systematic review indicated no clear benefit from the use of pressure-sensitive/electronic probes over contemporary manual probes. Manual probes remain the clinical standard for the diagnosis and monitoring of periodontitis patients.

Keywords: clinical attachment loss; diagnosis; periodontitis; probing depth.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aguero, A., J. J. Garnick, J. Keagle, D. E. Steflik, and W. O. Thompson. 1995. “Histological Location of a Standardized Periodontal Probe in Man.” Journal of Periodontology 66: 184–190.
    1. Anderson, G. B., R. G. Caffesse, C. E. Nasjleti, and B. A. Smith. 1991. “Correlation of Periodontal Probe Penetration and Degree of Inflammation.” American Journal of Dentistry 4, no. 4: 177–183.
    1. Andrade, R., M. Espinoza, E. M. Gomez, J. R. Espinoza, and E. Cruz. 2012. “Intra‐ and Inter‐Examiner Reproducibility of Manual Probing Depth.” Brazilian Oral Research 26, no. 1: 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1806‐83242012000100010.
    1. Armitage, G. C. 1996. “Manual Periodontal Probing in Supportive Periodontal Treatment.” Periodontology 2000 12: 33–39.
    1. Atassi, F., H. N. Newman, and J. S. Bulman. 1992. “Probe Tine Diameter and Probing Depth.” Journal of Clinical Periodontology 19, no. 5: 301–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600‐051x.1992.tb00648.x.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources