Home-use preventive and therapeutic oral products

Is it safe to use a toothbrush?

AIM

To systemically collect and summarize the literature on case reports concerning adverse events associated with the oral use of a toothbrush.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two electronic databases were searched for articles published up to October 2013 to identify appropriate studies using focused search terms and 'case reports' as a filter. Results. A comprehensive search identified 419 unique titles and abstracts. Ninety-four studies met the eligibility criteria. In total, 118 subjects (age range = 1-60 years) presented adverse events related to the oral use of a toothbrush. Events could be summarized in five categories, of which ingestion was the most reported problem among the individuals (50 cases). This was followed by impaction of a toothbrush (27 cases). Reports more frequently involved females and children were more likely to have injuries compared to males and adults. Most of the cases that presented with adverse events of the oral use of a toothbrush were referred for treatment to a physician.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined evidence related to serious adverse events as presented in case reports showed that the oral use of a toothbrush can be associated with ingestion, impaction, instant trauma, gingival traumatic injury and seizures. Given the incidence of reporting, important recommendations are that a toothbrush should not be used to induce vomiting, nor should people walk or run with this device in their mouths, especially children.

Low-cost periodontal therapy

Periodontitis is a complex infectious disease that affects low-income individuals disproportionately. Periodontitis is associated with specific bacterial species and herpesviruses, and successful prevention and treatment of the disease is contingent upon effective control of these pathogens. This article presents an efficacious, highly safe, minimally invasive, practical and low-cost periodontal therapy that involves professional and patient-administered mechanical therapy and antimicrobial agents. The major components are scaling for calculus removal, periodontal pocket irrigation with potent antiseptics, and treatment with systemic antibiotics for advanced disease. Povidone-iodine and sodium hypochlorite have all the characteristics for becoming the first-choice antiseptics in the management of periodontal diseases. Both agents show excellent antibacterial and antiviral properties, are readily available throughout the world, have been safely used in periodontal therapy for decades, offer significant benefits for individuals with very limited financial resources, and are well accepted by most dental professionals and patients. Four per cent chlorhexidine applied with a toothbrush to the most posterior part to the tongue dorsum can markedly reduce or eliminate halitosis in most individuals. Systemic antibiotics are used to treat periodontopathic bacteria that are not readily reached by topical therapy, such as pathogens within gingival tissue, within furcation defects, at the base of periodontal pockets, and on the tongue, tonsils and buccal mucosae. Valuable antibiotic therapies are amoxicillin-metronidazole (250 mg of amoxicillin and 250 mg of metronidazole, three times daily for 8 days) for young and middle-aged patients, and ciprofloxacin-metronidazole (500 mg of each, twice daily for 8 days) for elderly patients and for patients in developing countries who frequently harbor enteric rods subgingivally. Scaling to remove dental calculus and the prudent use of inexpensive antimicrobial agents can significantly retard or arrest progressive periodontitis in the great majority of patients.

Factors associated with changes in self-reported dentifrice consumption in a brazilian group from 1996 and 2009

The aim of the study was to determine factors associated with changes in self-reported dentifrice consumption in an urban population group over 13 years. This study evaluated two surveys of 671 and 688 households sampled in the urban area of a city from Southern Brazil in 1996 and 2009, respectively. The mother of the family was asked to answer a structured questionnaire about demographics, socioeconomic and behavioral variables. The primary outcome was obtained by questioning "how long does a dentifrice tube last in your house?" The cut-off point of duration was less than 1 month. It was used to determine high consumption of dentifrice (HCD). Associations between HCD and independent variables were evaluated by multivariable Poisson regression. There was a significant decrease of 20% (81.2% to 61.2%) in the prevalence of HCD between 1996 and 2009, resulting in a crude annual decrease of 1.54%. Mother's age, family income, dental assistance, mother's brushing frequency and number of household members that use a toothbrush were significantly associated with HCD independent from the year of survey. The prevalence ratio (PR) of HCD for the year of survey was 0.75, indicating an overall decrease of 25% in the probability of HCD from 1996 to 2009. Probabilities of HCD also decreased over the 13 years among the strata of education, number of household members and reason for choice of dentifrice. It may be concluded that the factors associated with the observed decrease were higher educational levels, larger number of household members and reasons for choosing a dentifrice related to preventive/therapeutic effects.

Supragingival plaque removal with and without dentifrice: a randomized controlled clinical trial

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of dental plaque removal by brushing with and without conventional dentifrice. Twenty-four students aged 17 to 28 years participated in this randomized controlled clinical trial. Quadrants 1-3 or 2-4 were randomly allocated to the test group (brushing without dentifrice) or control group (brushing with dentifrice). After 72 h of cessation of oral hygiene, Quigley & Hein (Turesky) plaque index was assessed before and after brushing by a calibrated and blind examiner. Overtime and intergroup comparisons were performed by Student's paired sample t-test at 5% significance level. The results showed that both groups after toothbrushing presented statistically significant reductions in plaque, with no differences between them (from 3.06 ± 0.54 to 1.27 ± 0.26 versus from 3.07 ± 0.52 to 1.31 ± 0.23). A separate analysis of the buccal and lingual aspects also showed no significant differences between groups. It may be concluded that the use of a conventional dentifrice during toothbrushing does not seem to enhance plaque removal capacity.

Consumo de dentifrício e fatores associados em um grupo populacional brasileiro

Este estudo transversal avaliou o consumo de dentifrício fluoretado e fatores associados em Passo Fundo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Seiscentos e oitenta e oito domicílios foram selecionados. Um questionário estruturado foi respondido pela mãe para obter dados demográficos, hábitos e consumo de dentifrício. O consumo foi avaliado por intermédio da duração de um tubo de dentifrício e considerado baixo (duração > 1 mês) e alto (duração < 1 mês). Modelos de regressão logística avaliaram a associação do consumo com variáveis independentes. Foi observado que 61,2% dos domicílios apresentaram alto consumo de dentifrício. No modelo multivariado, idade da mãe > 50 anos (OR = 1.62; IC95% 1,02-2,61), frequência de escovação da mãe (OR = 2,53; IC95%: 1,53-4,16), número de moradores que utilizam escova (OR = 5,69; IC95%: 3,68-8,81) e motivo cosmético para escolha do dentifrício (OR = 1,64; IC95%:1,03-2,61) representaram maior chance de alto consumo de dentifrício. Conclui-se que a maioria dos domicílios apresenta consumo elevado de dentifrício, associado com idade e frequência de escovação da mãe, número de moradores e motivos de escolha.