Loading…

Comparison of three fluids for calibration of the new Periotron® 8010

The aim of the present study was to calibrate the Periotron® model 8010 with volumes of three different fluids (distilled water, serum, and saliva) and to identify which of the three is the most reliable, feasible, and reproducible for routine calibration. A total of 450 samples of Periopaper® were...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal patología oral y cirugía bucal, 2023-11, Vol.28 (6), p.e519-e524
Main Authors: Fernández-Reyes, M, Márquez-Arrico, C-F, Silvestre, F-J, Perea-Galera, L, Silvestre-Rangil, J, Rocha, M
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page e524
container_issue 6
container_start_page e519
container_title Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal
container_volume 28
creator Fernández-Reyes, M
Márquez-Arrico, C-F
Silvestre, F-J
Perea-Galera, L
Silvestre-Rangil, J
Rocha, M
description The aim of the present study was to calibrate the Periotron® model 8010 with volumes of three different fluids (distilled water, serum, and saliva) and to identify which of the three is the most reliable, feasible, and reproducible for routine calibration. A total of 450 samples of Periopaper® were divided into three groups (150 each per group): distilled water, serum matrix and saliva. A calibration curve was run with 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 µl of each of the fluids, and the results were determined in Periotron units (PU). Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni's post hoc test and a linear equation. Distilled water presented the lowest levels of PU at all volumes, while serum showed the highest levels at high volumes. Linear regression equations rendered similar slopes for saliva and distilled water, while serum was statistically different. Saliva presented a reproduction percentage of 99.7%, which indicated better accuracy and precision than serum and distilled water. Saliva is more reliable and accurate than water or serum for the purpose of calibration of the Periotron® model 8010, though it shares drawbacks with serum. Distilled water is more easily available and does not require any additional procedure, in addition to producing a similar slope to saliva and a smaller deviation from the media than serum.
doi_str_mv 10.4317/medoral.25917
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10635629</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2806996076</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-d4d3a501bb6d5c4691e64bdc71a2b8cc3cb434a263d599a0065e03eef40ec66a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkM1OwzAQhC0EouXnyBX5yCXFjh07PiFUUUCqBAc4W46zoUZJXOwExEvxEDwZgf6onHal-TS7MwidUTLhjMrLBkofTD1JM0XlHhpTofJEKC72d_YROorxlRAmqRSHaMQkUUoSOUazqW-WJrjoW-wr3C0CAK7q3pURVz5ga2pXBNO5jQ64hQ_8CMH5Lvj2-wvnhJITdFCZOsLpeh6j59nN0_QumT_c3k-v54llnHdJyUtmMkKLQpSZ5UJRELworaQmLXJrmS044yYVrMyUMoSIDAgDqDgBK4Rhx-hq5bvsiyG5hbYbwutlcI0Jn9obp_8rrVvoF_-uKREsE6kaHC7WDsG_9RA73bhooa5NC76POs2JUEoQKQY0WaE2-BgDVNs7lOjf8vW6fP1X_sCf7z63pTdtsx_SJoMJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2806996076</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of three fluids for calibration of the new Periotron® 8010</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Fernández-Reyes, M ; Márquez-Arrico, C-F ; Silvestre, F-J ; Perea-Galera, L ; Silvestre-Rangil, J ; Rocha, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Fernández-Reyes, M ; Márquez-Arrico, C-F ; Silvestre, F-J ; Perea-Galera, L ; Silvestre-Rangil, J ; Rocha, M</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of the present study was to calibrate the Periotron® model 8010 with volumes of three different fluids (distilled water, serum, and saliva) and to identify which of the three is the most reliable, feasible, and reproducible for routine calibration. A total of 450 samples of Periopaper® were divided into three groups (150 each per group): distilled water, serum matrix and saliva. A calibration curve was run with 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 µl of each of the fluids, and the results were determined in Periotron units (PU). Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni's post hoc test and a linear equation. Distilled water presented the lowest levels of PU at all volumes, while serum showed the highest levels at high volumes. Linear regression equations rendered similar slopes for saliva and distilled water, while serum was statistically different. Saliva presented a reproduction percentage of 99.7%, which indicated better accuracy and precision than serum and distilled water. Saliva is more reliable and accurate than water or serum for the purpose of calibration of the Periotron® model 8010, though it shares drawbacks with serum. Distilled water is more easily available and does not require any additional procedure, in addition to producing a similar slope to saliva and a smaller deviation from the media than serum.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1698-6946</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1698-4447</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1698-6946</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4317/medoral.25917</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37099707</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Spain: Medicina Oral S.L</publisher><ispartof>Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal, 2023-11, Vol.28 (6), p.e519-e524</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2023 Medicina Oral S.L. 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10635629/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10635629/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37099707$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fernández-Reyes, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Márquez-Arrico, C-F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestre, F-J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perea-Galera, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestre-Rangil, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rocha, M</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of three fluids for calibration of the new Periotron® 8010</title><title>Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal</title><addtitle>Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal</addtitle><description>The aim of the present study was to calibrate the Periotron® model 8010 with volumes of three different fluids (distilled water, serum, and saliva) and to identify which of the three is the most reliable, feasible, and reproducible for routine calibration. A total of 450 samples of Periopaper® were divided into three groups (150 each per group): distilled water, serum matrix and saliva. A calibration curve was run with 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 µl of each of the fluids, and the results were determined in Periotron units (PU). Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni's post hoc test and a linear equation. Distilled water presented the lowest levels of PU at all volumes, while serum showed the highest levels at high volumes. Linear regression equations rendered similar slopes for saliva and distilled water, while serum was statistically different. Saliva presented a reproduction percentage of 99.7%, which indicated better accuracy and precision than serum and distilled water. Saliva is more reliable and accurate than water or serum for the purpose of calibration of the Periotron® model 8010, though it shares drawbacks with serum. Distilled water is more easily available and does not require any additional procedure, in addition to producing a similar slope to saliva and a smaller deviation from the media than serum.</description><issn>1698-6946</issn><issn>1698-4447</issn><issn>1698-6946</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkM1OwzAQhC0EouXnyBX5yCXFjh07PiFUUUCqBAc4W46zoUZJXOwExEvxEDwZgf6onHal-TS7MwidUTLhjMrLBkofTD1JM0XlHhpTofJEKC72d_YROorxlRAmqRSHaMQkUUoSOUazqW-WJrjoW-wr3C0CAK7q3pURVz5ga2pXBNO5jQ64hQ_8CMH5Lvj2-wvnhJITdFCZOsLpeh6j59nN0_QumT_c3k-v54llnHdJyUtmMkKLQpSZ5UJRELworaQmLXJrmS044yYVrMyUMoSIDAgDqDgBK4Rhx-hq5bvsiyG5hbYbwutlcI0Jn9obp_8rrVvoF_-uKREsE6kaHC7WDsG_9RA73bhooa5NC76POs2JUEoQKQY0WaE2-BgDVNs7lOjf8vW6fP1X_sCf7z63pTdtsx_SJoMJ</recordid><startdate>20231101</startdate><enddate>20231101</enddate><creator>Fernández-Reyes, M</creator><creator>Márquez-Arrico, C-F</creator><creator>Silvestre, F-J</creator><creator>Perea-Galera, L</creator><creator>Silvestre-Rangil, J</creator><creator>Rocha, M</creator><general>Medicina Oral S.L</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20231101</creationdate><title>Comparison of three fluids for calibration of the new Periotron® 8010</title><author>Fernández-Reyes, M ; Márquez-Arrico, C-F ; Silvestre, F-J ; Perea-Galera, L ; Silvestre-Rangil, J ; Rocha, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-d4d3a501bb6d5c4691e64bdc71a2b8cc3cb434a263d599a0065e03eef40ec66a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fernández-Reyes, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Márquez-Arrico, C-F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestre, F-J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perea-Galera, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestre-Rangil, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rocha, M</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fernández-Reyes, M</au><au>Márquez-Arrico, C-F</au><au>Silvestre, F-J</au><au>Perea-Galera, L</au><au>Silvestre-Rangil, J</au><au>Rocha, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of three fluids for calibration of the new Periotron® 8010</atitle><jtitle>Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal</jtitle><addtitle>Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal</addtitle><date>2023-11-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e519</spage><epage>e524</epage><pages>e519-e524</pages><issn>1698-6946</issn><issn>1698-4447</issn><eissn>1698-6946</eissn><abstract>The aim of the present study was to calibrate the Periotron® model 8010 with volumes of three different fluids (distilled water, serum, and saliva) and to identify which of the three is the most reliable, feasible, and reproducible for routine calibration. A total of 450 samples of Periopaper® were divided into three groups (150 each per group): distilled water, serum matrix and saliva. A calibration curve was run with 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 µl of each of the fluids, and the results were determined in Periotron units (PU). Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni's post hoc test and a linear equation. Distilled water presented the lowest levels of PU at all volumes, while serum showed the highest levels at high volumes. Linear regression equations rendered similar slopes for saliva and distilled water, while serum was statistically different. Saliva presented a reproduction percentage of 99.7%, which indicated better accuracy and precision than serum and distilled water. Saliva is more reliable and accurate than water or serum for the purpose of calibration of the Periotron® model 8010, though it shares drawbacks with serum. Distilled water is more easily available and does not require any additional procedure, in addition to producing a similar slope to saliva and a smaller deviation from the media than serum.</abstract><cop>Spain</cop><pub>Medicina Oral S.L</pub><pmid>37099707</pmid><doi>10.4317/medoral.25917</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1698-6946
ispartof Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal, 2023-11, Vol.28 (6), p.e519-e524
issn 1698-6946
1698-4447
1698-6946
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10635629
source PubMed Central
title Comparison of three fluids for calibration of the new Periotron® 8010
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T03%3A37%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20three%20fluids%20for%20calibration%20of%20the%20new%20Periotron%C2%AE%208010&rft.jtitle=Medicina%20oral,%20patolog%C3%ADa%20oral%20y%20cirug%C3%ADa%20bucal&rft.au=Fern%C3%A1ndez-Reyes,%20M&rft.date=2023-11-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e519&rft.epage=e524&rft.pages=e519-e524&rft.issn=1698-6946&rft.eissn=1698-6946&rft_id=info:doi/10.4317/medoral.25917&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2806996076%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-d4d3a501bb6d5c4691e64bdc71a2b8cc3cb434a263d599a0065e03eef40ec66a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2806996076&rft_id=info:pmid/37099707&rfr_iscdi=true