Cited by 671Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsDental Health and Care Utilization

Bleeding on probing. A predictor for the progression of periodontal disease?

Lang, Niklaus P., Joss, Andreas, Orsanic, Thomas, Gusberti, Francesco A., Siegrist, Beatrice E.·1986·Journal of Clinical Periodontology

Abstract

Abstract Bleeding on probing (BOP) is a widely used criterion to diagnose gingival inflammation. The purpose of the present retrospective study was to evaluate its prognostic value in identifying sites at risk for periodontal breakdown during the maintenance phase of periodontal therapy. 55 patients who had been treated for advanced periodontitis participated in a recall system for at least 4 years, at regular intervals of 3–5 months. At the start of every appointment, BOP to the bottom of the pocket was registered at 4 sites of every tooth. A random selection of 1054 pockets was made and subdivided into 5 categories according to the incidence of BOP during the last 4 recall appointments. All pockets with a BOP incidence of 4/4 and 3/4 were selected, while only interproximal sites with a BOP incidence of 2/4, 1/4 and 0/4 were chosen. Subsequently, these categories were grouped according to whether or not the attachment level had been maintained from the time prior to the last 4 recall visits. 2 mm was defined as loss of clinical attachment. The results indicated that pockets with a probing depth of 5 mm had a significantly higher incidence of BOP. Patients with 16% or more BOP sites had a higher chance of loosing attachment. Pockets with an incidence of BOP of 4/4 had a 30% chance of loosing attachment. This chance decreased to 14% with BOP of 3/4, 6% with BOP of 2/4, 3% with BOP of 1/4 and 1.5% with BOP of 0/4. Sensitivity and predictability calculations revealed that BOP is a limited but yet useful prognostic indicator in clinical diagnosis for patients in periodontal maintenance phase.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1986.tb00852.x

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lang, N. P., Joss, A., Orsanic, T., Gusberti, F. A., & Siegrist, B. E.
Affiliations
University of Bern (CH)
Corresponding author
Lang, Niklaus P.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1986-07
Volume
13
Issue
6
Pages
590-596
ISSN
  • 0303-6979 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-051X
OpenAlex
W2019848149
Cited by
671
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 27
FWCI
9.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal Of Clinical Periodontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Dental Health and Care Utilization
Keywords
bleeding on probing, periodontal disease progression, clinical attachment loss, periodontitis, gingivitis, periodontal maintenance, probing depth, attachment level, prognostic factors
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Forecasting, Gingival Hemorrhage, Oral Hemorrhage, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Periodontal Pocket, Periodontitis, Prognosis, Recurrence, Retrospective Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review