Do you think the mixed method is the most effective?
Yes, I usually think that using ultrasound and manual instrumentation can provide better results. I think ultrasonic dental supplies are widely accepted as a parallel method for non-surgical periodontal treatment or maintenance. The periodontal disease society of America (AAP) about the location of the audio-visual and periodontal disease starts, "seems to have similar results, ultrasonic and sound velocity scalar as hand tools to remove plaque, stones and endotoxin. "As a profession, I think we should try to solve this problem and go back to the basics."
First, an in-depth patient assessment of the patient's periodontal disease, pocket depth, and exploratory bleeding is a window of inflammation. Then, the dental hygienist can make a treatment plan, decide which problems to solve, and which model will achieve the most effective goals. Treatment decisions can only be made if the problem is understood. Some dental hygienists seem to be looking for a cure for all types. Instead, I think we should try to be a good diagnostic expert for the problems we're trying to solve.
Is there a myth about ultrasound?
Today's oral hygiene, ultrasound machines are often thought to be magical. This is a misconception. It is difficult to insert deep pockets. Another wrong idea is that when the ultrasound prompts a few times to move back and forth in a deep pocket, the water's action generates enough equipment. Literature does not support this. The biofilm is only removed from the point of contact with the tooth at the tip of the instrument and the narrow band next to it. Thorough instruments require considerable stroke and contact with all different areas of the tooth.
Another myth is that ultrasound machines are more effective because they are faster. Rapid strokes are used when biofilms are removed, but a rapid stroke is only effective if it is well adapted and when exposed to all aspects of the tooth.
A stroke
Q: what type of stroke should an ultrasound machine use?
With biofilms, dental hygieners can have a faster stroke than heavier ones, because slower strokes are more effective. By putting small cracks into the sediments, a great deal of calculus breaks the effect of ultrasound. Therefore, in order to develop micro-cracks, the tip needs to be on the surface for a period of time. Slow strokes seem to be more effective when lots of calculus appears there. The maximum energy should be used when the tip of the needle is directly on a tough stone. Most of the power is concentrated at the tip of the tip.
In my experience, ultrasound can enhance the heavy calculus, especially the quick wipe. This can be avoided because removing a polished sediment is much more difficult than it was at the beginning. Once it's smooth and smooth, calculus is hard to find and hard to remove.
tip
What is the most widely used tip in practice?
As far as I know, the most important thing is the direct and slim haircut, which is the secret of prevention. It is used in healthy mouth, shallow pockets, very light sediments, and low power.
The use of various techniques and tools to fit the profile of teeth is key to effective dental equipment. Using only one kind of ultrasonic tip is not as effective as using a hand instrument.
When need into deeper area, can use a to the tip of the side (right or left of slender style), it is placed parallel to the axis of the teeth, so that it can like periodontal probe into the deep areas. Using a side tip is not easy, and it takes skill, skill, skill and time to measure all of the root anatomy in deep pockets.
What techniques are used for moderate calculus?
If calculus is fairly easy, you can use a long, thin style hint. However, when the heavier calculus is discovered, it is fixed and difficult to remove, so a greater force is needed. For heavy calculus, a trick must have some important movement to fight calculus, otherwise it won't work.
