Variations in the Measurement of Periodontal Disease with Use of Radiographs

The gingiva-bone count was used clinically, with posterior bitewing radiographs and with a full survey of 14 apical radiographs to determine variations in scoring of periodon-tal disease. Neither type of radiograph pro-duced increases in findings large and stand-ard enough to justify use in largescale epi-demiologic surveying. Indexes for the measurement of dental dis-ease are of necessity constructed in terms of affected teeth, affected root surfaces, affected soft tissue regions, or other designated loca-tions, with or without some measurement of the severity of the damage described. Thus, in a theoretical sense, indexes are independ-ent of the method of examination used to collect data. In a practical sense, however, certain indexes fit best with certain common methods of dental examination. Some prog-ress has been made in studying variations in the efficiency of various dental examina-tion methods as related to counts of decayed, missing, and filled (DMF) teeth and DMF surfaces for the study of dental caries. ' Few, if any, data are available on the efficiency of various examination methods in relation to the measurements of periodontal disease. The common types of dental inspection or examination, as defined by the American Dental Association2 for purposes of stand-ardization, are all in daily use by dentists and dental public health workers. Wherever simpler methods are used, the question al-ways arises as to how much additional patho-sis would have been shown by periapical radiographs. This is particularly true for periodontal disease. Limited examination with posterior bite-wing radiographs presents a difficulty. These This investigation was presented at the 46th Genera