Zanatta 2006.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT with 3‐arm parallel design Recruitment period: March 2004–July 2004 Setting: university dental clinic, San Paulo, Brazil Number of centres: 1 Funding source: unclear
Participants	Inclusion criteria: diagnosis: chronic periodontitis with PD ≥ 5 mm and BOP. All participants in good general health Exclusion criteria: SRP in past 6 months or on antibiotics from 6 months before or during study, pregnancy, allergic to iodine Age: 27–72 years Sex: 18 F and 27 M Smokers: unclear Number randomised: 45 (15 per group) Number evaluated: 40 (FMS: 12; FMD: 15; control: 13)
Interventions	Comparison: FMS vs control; FMD vs control; FMS vs FMD FMS group: (PDG) FMS 1 session US scaling with 0.9% slaine (duration 45 minutes) FMD group: (PD‐PIG): FMS 1 session US scaling with povidone iodine 0.5% (duration 45 minutes) Control group: QRP 4 sessions US scaling with water, 1‐week intervals (duration unclear) OHI before study start: yes Instruments used: US instruments Time per Q: unclear Maintenance: twice weekly from baseline Retreatment: none Duration of study: 3 months
Outcomes	Primary outcome: PPD (6 sites per tooth) Secondary outcomes: CAL, BOP (6 sites per tooth). Computerised probe with stent for all measurements Teeth: whole‐mouth recordings (baseline, 1 and 3 months). Data split initial moderate (PPD 5–6 mm) and deep pockets (PPD > 6 mm) Pocket depth at baseline: moderate (5–6 mm), deep (> 6 mm) Outcome time reported: 3 months used Other outcomes: PI, GR
Notes	Dropouts: 45 enrolled, 40 completed the study. Time point for dropouts unclear For BOP: data extracted from graphs
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "Patients were randomly assigned to one of the following treatment groups…".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Unclear.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "A previously calibrated examiner, masked to the type of treatment, performed all clinical assessments".
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Low dropout (5/45) and numbers by group given but reasons not given.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Data reported on all primary and secondary outcomes.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Baseline balance good for pocket depth but smoking is unclear. No apparent other biases.