The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 137, No 3, 288.
© 2006 American Dental Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mjör, I. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mjör, I. A.

LETTERS

TO PROBE OR NOT TO PROBE

November JADA’s Point/ Counterpoint article, "Should a Dental Explorer Be Used to Probe Suspected Carious Lesions?," brings up an important topic ( Hamilton JC, Stookey G. JADA 2005;136: 1526–32 ). The topic is important because of the common use of an explorer (or probe, in British terminology) in the examination and treatment planning of dental patients. The essential difference between the two views expressed focuses on the pressure used on the explorer when examining for caries.

Dr. Hamilton correctly quotes statements from two of my publications,1,2 but in a way that makes me seem to be a supporter of the use of an explorer for the diagnosis of secondary/ recurrent carious lesions. It should be noted that I merely reported what clinicians used, rather than expressing an opinion about the suitability of using an explorer.

If anyone is interested in my view relating to the use of an explorer for diagnosis of secondary/recurrent caries, they should consult my October JADA article,3 in which I state on page 1429: "It is important in this situation to keep in mind that an explorer will stick in any crevice, regardless of whether it is carious." These views also were expressed in the other two publications referred to by Dr. Hamilton.

So, where do I stand on the issue of using an explorer in diagnosing carious lesions? I believe it will be used by clinicians in the foreseeable future, much the way it was used in the past, but hopefully with less force than most clinicians have tended to exert in the past.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 REFERENCES
 
  1. Mjör IA. Frequency of secondary caries at various anatomical locations. Oper Dent 1985;10:88–92.[Medline]

  2. Mjör IA. The location of clinically diagnosed secondary caries. Quintessence Int 1998;29:313–7.[Medline]

  3. Mjör IA. Clinical diagnosis of recurrent caries. JADA 2005;136:1426–33.



Ivar A. Mjör, DDS, MSD, MS, DrOdont, Professor
Academy 100 Eminent Scholar, College of Dentistry, University of Florida, Gainesville



This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mjör, I. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mjör, I. A.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS