Skip to main content
. 2021 Dec 26;9(36):11300–11310. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i36.11300

Table 3.

Bonferroni post hoc analysis of probing pocket depth, clinical attachment loss and periodontal inflamed surface area among the study groups

Dependent variable
Group
Group
Mean difference
SE
Significant
95% confidence interval
Upper bound
Lower bound
Mean PPD I II 0.76778 0.1330 0.000 1.089 0.4463
III 0.83550 0.1330 0.000 1.157 0.5140
II III 0.06772 0.1330 1.00 0.3892 0.2538
Mean CAL I II 0.93488 0.1618 0.000 1.326 0.5438
III 1.08697 0.1618 0.000 1.478 0.6959
II III 0.15208 0.1618 1.00 0.5432 0.2390
Mean PISA I II 654.278 127.80 0.000 963.166 345.391
III 677.836 127.80 0.000 986.723 368.948
II III 23.557 127.80 1.00 332.444 285.330

Group I: Well-controlled T2DM; Group II: Uncontrolled T2DM group without microvascular complications; Group III: Uncontrolled T2DM group with microvascular complications. There was no significant difference between uncontrolled T2DM without microvascular complications group and uncontrolled T2DM group with microvascular complications for mean probing pocket depth, clinical attachment loss, and periodontal inflamed surface area (P = 1.00). SE: Standard error; PPD: Probing pocket depth; CAL: Clinical attachment loss; PISA: Periodontal inflamed surface area; T2DM: Type 2 diabetes mellitus.