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 Mar 4:2025:7131637.
doi: 10.1155/ijod/7131637. eCollection 2025.

Differences Between Two Devices With Function of Periopolishing and Piezoelectric Scaler: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Alessandro Chiesa  1 , Maurizio Pascadopoli  2 , Andrea Butera  1 , Marco Monticone  3 , Maria Mirando  4 , Filippo Vezzoni  4 , Andi Kertalli  1 , Andrea Scribante  1   2 , Gianna Maria Nardi  5
Affiliations

Differences Between Two Devices With Function of Periopolishing and Piezoelectric Scaler: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Alessandro Chiesa et al. Int J Dent. .

Abstract

Dental procedures often cause anxiety and apprehension in patients due to potential discomfort and pain. Understanding patient sensitivity and comfort is critical to providing effective dental care. The aim of this study was to compare patient and operator comfort between two devices with the function of periopolishing and piezoelectric scaler during guided biofilm therapy (GBT) sessions. A randomized controlled trial was conducted involving 20 patients and operators. Primary outcomes, including pain, sensitivity, and operator comfort, were assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS), while periodontal indices served as secondary outcomes. The results showed comparable levels of patient and operator comfort between the two devices, with higher airflow comfort reported for the Mectron Combi Touch and higher ultrasonic handpiece comfort showed for the EMS Prophylaxis Master. Both devices effectively reduced periodontal parameters without significant differences. These results indicate that both Mectron Combi Touch and EMS Prophylaxis Master offer viable options for efficient and patient-friendly periodontal treatment. The study provides valuable insights for improving patient experience and treatment outcomes in the dental office. Considerations for device selection based on clinical needs and patient comfort are discussed, as well as future perspectives for advancing preventive dental care. This research contributes to the ongoing topic of improving dental procedures to ensure optimal patient satisfaction and oral health outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05263622.

Keywords: air polishing; comfort operator; dental hygiene; dentistry; oral care; periodontal parameters; periodontology; piezoelectric scaler; randomized clinical trial; ultrasound.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of pain scores between EMS and Mectron following the treatment (0: no pain; 10: maximum pain).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of sensitivity scores between EMS and Mectron following the treatment (0: no sensitivity; 10: maximum sensitivity).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of ultrasound comfort scores between EMS and Mectron following the treatment (0: no comfort; 10: maximum comfort).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Comparison of airflow comfort scores between EMS and Mectron following the treatment (0: no comfort; 10: maximum comfort).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Bleeding on probing (BoP) measured over time (T0 vs. T1) after treatment with EMS and Mectron.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Plaque control record (PCR) measured over time (T0 vs. T1) after treatment with EMS and Mectron.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Bleeding score (BS) measured over time (T0 vs. T1) after treatment with EMS and Mectron.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Braun A., Krause F., Nolden R., Frentzen M. Subjective Intensity of Pain During the Treatment of Periodontal Lesions With the Vector-System. Journal of Periodontal Research . 2003;38(2):135–140. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0765.2003.00356.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moore R., Brødsgaard I. Dentists’ Perceived Stress and Its Relation to Perceptions About Anxious Patients. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology . 2001;29(1):73–80. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2001.00011.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Armfield J. M., Heaton L. J. Management of Fear and Anxiety in the Dental Clinic: A Review. Australian Dental Journal . 2013;58(4):390–407. - PubMed
    1. Newton J. T., Asimakopoulou K. Managing Oral Hygiene as a Risk Factor for Periodontal Disease: A Systematic Review of Psychological Approaches to Behaviour Change for Improved Plaque Control in Periodontal Management. Journal of Clinical Periodontology . 2015;42(S16):S36–S36. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12356. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Preda C., Butera A., Pelle S., et al. The Efficacy of Powered Oscillating Heads vs. Powered Sonic Action Heads Toothbrushes to Maintain Periodontal and Peri-Implant Health: A Narrative Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health . 2021;18(4) doi: 10.3390/ijerph18041468.1468 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources