The efficacy of oral irrigation in addition to a toothbrush on plaque and the clinical parameters of periodontal inflammation: a systematic review

Essential oils mouthwash with or without alcohol in relation to effect on parameters of plaque and gingivitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The primary aim was to systematically assess the available literature on the effect of an essential oils mouthwash without alcohol (EOalc-) compared to an essential oils mouthwash with alcohol (EOalc+) on plaque scores and parameters of gingival health. The secondary aim was to evaluate user appreciation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The MEDLINE-PubMed and Cochrane-CENTRAL databases were searched to identify eligible studies published up to and including March 2024. Papers comparing the effectiveness of EOalc- and EOalc+ were included. The quality was assessed. A descriptive analysis and a meta-analysis were performed.

RESULTS

After screening, seven papers were found to be eligible. The descriptive analysis demonstrates a significant difference in plaque scores in favour of EOalc+. This is confirmed by the meta-analyses of plaque scores in non-brushing and brushing studies (DiffM = 0.40; 95% CI [0.27; 0.53], p < 0.00001 and DiffM = 0.05; 95% CI [0.01; 0.10], p = 0.01, respectively). This finding is also supported by the sub-analysis of brands. The meta-analyses of bleeding and gingival scores in brushing studies did not show significant differences between products. For user appreciation, the difference found was for taste perception in favour of EOalc- (DiffM = 1.63; 95% CI [0.72; 2.55], p = 0.0004).

CONCLUSION

When an EO-mouthwash is used in non-brushing or brushing situations, with small to moderate certainty, EOalc- provided less effect regarding plaque control than EOalc+. For bleeding and gingival index there is weak certainty for no difference. In terms of the taste perception EOalc- seems more appreciated.

Efficacy of a water flosser compared to an interdental brush on gingival bleeding and gingival abrasion: A 4 week randomized controlled trial

AIM

To determine the efficacy of a water flosser (WF) compared to an interdental brush (IDB) in reducing gingival inflammation. Additionally, the products were compared on the incidence of gingival abrasion.

METHODS

Young adults with moderate gingivitis and ≥4 accessible interdental spaces by IDB in each quadrant were selected for this study. Participants were randomly assigned a WF or an IDB as an adjunct to manual toothbrushing. Clinical signs of inflammation were measured in two randomly assigned contralateral quadrants by bleeding on pocket probing (BOPP) or bleeding on marginal probing (BOMP). Gingival Abrasion Score (GAS) was assessed per quadrant. Data was recorded at the baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks.

RESULTS

Both groups WF (n = 40) and IDB (n = 38) showed a significant reduction (p = 0.000) in BOMP and BOPP from the baseline to 4 weeks for all sites and the interdental sites only. At 4 weeks the WF group compared to the IDB group showed significantly lower BOPP (p = 0.030) and BOMP scores (p = 0.003) for all sites. For the interdental sites WF showed compared to IDB for BOMP significant (p = 0.019) lower values but not for BOPP (p = 0.219). There were no differences between the groups for GAS at any time point.

CONCLUSION

In patients with moderate gingivitis, after 4 weeks use the WF is more effective than the IDB in obtaining marginal gingival health.

Efficacy of oral irrigators compared to other interdental aids for managing peri-implant diseases: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Peri-implant diseases (peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis) are inflammatory conditions that affect the peri-implant tissues and are induced by microbial biofilms (dental plaque) formed around the implant. Removal of biofilm is the fundamental step in managing peri-implant diseases. Interdental cleaning aids such as interdental brush, unitufted brush, or oral irrigation along with regular toothbrushing are recommended for effective plaque control around implants. The present systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy of home use of oral irrigators compared to other plaque control methods for managing peri-implant diseases.

METHOD

This systematic review has been prepared using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA) checklist. Five databases were searched using the following keywords: "Peri-implantitis" OR Periimplantitis OR "Peri-implant disease" OR "Peri-implant Mucositis" AND "Oral irrigation" OR "Oral Irrigator" OR Waterpik OR "Interdental irrigation" OR "Oral Spray" OR "Oral Irrigants".

RESULTS

Oral irrigator along with mechanical brushing was found to be more effective than mechanical brushing alone in reducing the plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and bleeding on probing (BOP). No statistically significant difference in improvement in quality of life and patient satisfaction with regard to comfort and ease of use was noted upon using mechanical toothbrushing alone and an oral irrigator. Implant sites where an oral irrigator was used showed more reduction in BOP (81.8% vs 33.35%) compared to sites where the floss was used (P = 0.0018). The levels of the red and orange complex bacteria in the peri-implant biofilm were lower with the use of an oral irrigator than with toothbrushing alone.

CONCLUSION

Oral irrigators along with toothbrushing were found to be more effective in removing microbial plaque around implants and controlling peri-implant inflammation compared to mechanical brushing alone. The reduction in BOP was better with the use of oral irrigation compared to floss and interdental brush.

Adjunctive therapea - a promising method in the treatment of periodontal disease

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study is to compare the clinical efficacy of the application of "Armenicum" paste as an adjunct to SRP for the non-surgical treatment of patients with periodontitis.

METHODS

The current RCT prospective study was conducted on 157 patients with chronic periodontitis. The patients were blind randomly assigned into two groups: Group A (SRP + Armenicum" paste) 81 patients (42 males and 39 females, 37 to 68 years) and Group B (SRP) 76 patients (39 males and 37 females, 37 to 68 years). Periodontal indices BOP, PPD, and DPI within each treatment group were measured before periodontal therapy, 3 and 6 months after the treatment. Group A underwent a periodontal treatment which included: supragingival and subgingival scaling, and additional use of local "Armenicum" paste. The Group B group only received supragingival and subgingival scaling.

RESULTS

In our study, the mean BOP, DPI, and PPD showed a statistically significant difference from baseline to 3 months and 6 months (p ≤ 0.05) in both Group A and Group B. But, mean BOP and mean PPD reduction gain was found to be greater in Group-A than Group B at 3 months and 6 months. No statistical differences in clinical indices were recorded depending on gender and age.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that topical "Armenicum" paste provides an effective adjunctive treatment of chronic periodontitis.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The results of the current study showed that the adjunctive use of "Armenicum" reduced signs of inflammation compared to standard SRP treatment alone. Periodontal therapy using Armenicum paste application can be considered as a promising method in the treatment of periodontitis.

Cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with microburst technology in adolescent orthodontic patients. A randomized-controlled crossover study

OBJECTIVES

Simplifying interdental space cleaning is a constantly discussed topic. The present study aimed to compare the cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with that of dental flossing in adolescent patients with fixed braces after four weeks of home-use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study design is a randomized, single-blinded cross-over study. Following a twenty-eight-day period of product utilization in a home setting, a comparative analysis was conducted on hygiene indices, the Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) and the Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), between the test group (oral irrigator) and the control group (dental floss).

RESULTS

Seventeen adolescent individuals completed the study. After 28 days of cleaning with the oral irrigator, RMNPI was 58.81% (55.31-66.47) compared to 59.46% (52.68-68.67) with dental floss (p = 0.070). Subgroup analyses did not indicate the superiority of either method. GBI after the test phase with the oral irrigator was 28.93% (23.21-33.97) and insignificantly higher compared to 26.40% (21.01-31.41) achieved with dental floss (p = 0.1585).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither of the two products demonstrated statistically significant superiority in terms of cleaning efficacy. Therefore, no recommendation can be made in favor of one over the other. It was found that the high initial hygiene indices for fixed orthodontic appliances could be improved through increased awareness and precise instruction.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

For adolescent patients who struggle to use interdental brushes an oral irrigator may be suggested as a simple alternative in hard-to-reach areas, such as those around a fixed dental appliance.

Oral Irrigation Devices: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

Self-performed oral hygiene is essential for preventing dental caries, periodontal, and peri-implant diseases. Oral irrigators are adjunctive oral home care aids that may benefit oral health. However, the effects of oral irrigation on oral health, its role in oral home care, and its mechanism of action are not fully understood. A comprehensive search of the literature revealed no existing broad scoping reviews on oral irrigators. Therefore, this study aimed to provide a comprehensive systematic review of the literature on oral irrigation devices and identify evidence gaps.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines were utilized to prepare the review. Four databases and eight gray literature sources were searched for English publications across any geographical location or setting.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-five sources were included, predominantly from scientific journals and academic settings. Most studies originated from North America. Research primarily involved adults, with limited studies in children and adolescents. Oral irrigation was safe and well-accepted when used appropriately. It reduced periodontal inflammation, potentially by modulating the oral microbiota, but further research needs to clarify its mechanism of action. Promising results were reported in populations with dental implants and special needs. Patient acceptance appeared high, but standardized patient-reported outcome measures were rarely used. Anti-inflammatory benefits occurred consistently across populations and irrigant solutions. Plaque reduction findings were mixed, potentially reflecting differences in study designs and devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral irrigators reduce periodontal inflammation, but their impact on plaque removal remains unclear. Well-designed, sufficiently powered trials of appropriate duration need to assess the clinical, microbiological, and inflammatory responses of the periodontium to oral irrigation, particularly those with periodontitis, dental implants, and special needs. Patient-reported outcome measures, costs, caries prevention, and environmental impact of oral irrigation need to be compared to other oral hygiene aids.

Self-determined use of provided powered oral hygiene devices leads to improved gingival health after 1 year: a longitudinal clinical trial

PURPOSE

Our study aimed to evaluate the long-term concordance and acceptance when using powered devices for everyday oral hygiene routine and gingival health in patients showing papillary bleeding.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-one participants were recruited at the dental clinic of the University Hospital of Cologne, Germany, over a 6-week duration. At baseline, a standard dental check-up was performed, including oral hygiene indices and documentation of oral hygiene devices used. The study consisted of two consecutive phases: the first (motivational trial) was designed to prove the effectiveness and safety of a microdroplet device and a powered toothbrush compared to dental floss and a manual toothbrush over a period of 4 weeks. The second (observational) phase began with all participants receiving the powered oral homecare devices. Participants were able to use their oral hygiene measures of choice over an unsupervised period of 1 year. All participants were then rescheduled for a routine dental check-up, where oral hygiene indices and oral hygiene devices used were reevaluated.

RESULTS

After 1 year, 93.3% of participants stated they performed interdental cleaning on a regular basis (baseline 60.0%). The percentage using a powered toothbrush increased from 41.9% (baseline) to 90.0% after 1 year. Oral hygiene parameters had improved after both the motivational trial and observational phases compared to baseline (papillary bleeding index p = .000; Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index p < .05; Quigley-Hein Index p = .000).

CONCLUSION

In the long term, participants preferred using powered oral hygiene devices over the gold standard dental floss and manual toothbrush. Improved oral hygiene parameters after 1 year may indicate implementation of newly acquired oral-hygiene skills during the 4-week instruction phase.

Comparison of plaque control record measurements obtained using intraoral scanner and direct visualization

OBJECTIVE

Intraoral scanner (IOS) can acquire three-dimensional color images of teeth. Thus, the detection of areas with plaque adhesion stained by plaque-disclosing solutions using an IOS could be a potential oral hygiene evaluation method. This study aimed to verify the usefulness of obtaining O'Leary's plaque control record (PCR) measurements using an IOS in clinical practice.

METHODS

Twenty patients with >20% PCR measurements who underwent oral prophylaxis were enrolled in this study. A plaque-disclosing gel was applied to stain the areas with plaque adhesion, and the dentition was scanned using the IOS. The PCR values obtained via the direct method and those obtained using the digital image were compared for the entire dentition, maxillary total area, the labial and palatal aspects of the maxillary anterior teeth, the buccal and palatal aspects of the maxillary posterior teeth, mandibular total area, the labial and lingual aspects of the mandibular anterior teeth, and the buccal and lingual aspects of the mandibular posterior teeth.

RESULTS

The IOS group tended to have higher values than the direct observation group. The labial and palatal aspect of the maxillary anterior teeth, the labial and lingual aspects of the mandibular anterior teeth did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Plaque adhesion was visualized easily and conclusively using an IOS. As the large tip size often hinders its use, it is necessary to develop a smaller IOS tip in the future.

A Personalised 3D-Printed Dental Plaque Removal Mouthguard for Older Adults

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to examine the plaque removal effectiveness of a personalised 3D-printed dental plaque removal mouthguard device in a clinical trial setting.

METHODS

A personalised 3D-printed mouthguard was developed to clean dental plaque using micro-mist. A clinical trial was conducted to examine the plaque removal effectiveness of this device. The clinical trial recruited 55 participants (21 males and 34 females) with an average age of 68.4 years (range, 60-81 years). Dental plaque was dyed by plaque disclosing liquid (Ci). Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TMQHPI) was used to evaluate the level and rate of plaque formation on the tooth surface. The TMQHPI was recorded and intraoral photos were taken before and after mouthguard cleaning. The plaque removal rate was calculated based on TMQHPI and intraoral photos (pixel-based method) before and after cleaning.

RESULTS

The personalised 3D-printed micro-mist injection mouthguard can be effective in dental plaque removal on tooth and gingiva, and the effectiveness lies between that of a manual toothbrush and a mouth rinse. The newly proposed pixel-based method can be a practical, high sensitive tool to evaluate the level of plaque formation.

CONCLUSIONS

Under the conditions of the present study, we conclude that the personalised 3D-printed micro-mist injection mouthguard can be useful in reducing dental plaque and may be especially suitable for older adults and disabled people.

The efficacy of the dental Water Jet, orthodontic, and conventional toothbrushes in plaque removal around orthodontic braces in adolescents: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Orthodontic treatment improves both masticatory function and the aspects of facial esthetics through the correct alignment of the teeth. If oral hygiene is neglected during fixed orthodontic treatment, it may lead to plaque accumulation and gingivitis. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of the dental Water Jet (DWJ), and orthodontic toothbrush (O-TH) in removing dental plaque around the orthodontic braces compared to conventional toothbrush (C-TH) in adolescents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a three-arm, double-blind, and parallel-group randomized active-controlled trial. Forty-five patients were randomly allocated into three groups: DWJ, the O-TH, and the C-TH (control group). The primary outcome measure was dental plaque accumulation change from the baseline (t0 ) to post-cleaning (t1 ), and plaque scores were recorded using the Orthodontic Plaque Index (OPI). The current clinical trial was registered and approved by Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12623000524695).

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference was noted in the OPI scores between different time points in the DWJ group, the O-TH group, and the C-TH group (p < .05). However, no significant difference was noted between the groups after the cleaning procedure (p > .05).

CONCLUSION

The level of oral hygiene was not satisfactory in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment. In addition, the efficacy of the DWJ was not superior to O-TH nor to C-TH in plaque removal.

Effects of water flossing on gingival inflammation and supragingival plaque microbiota: a 12-week randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The effects of water flossing on dental plaque removal have been suggested, but its ecological impact on dental plaque microbiota needs further investigation. In addition, whether this plaque control measure by water flossing promotes the control of halitosis still needs clinical validation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of water flossing on gingival inflammation and supragingival plaque microbiota.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy participants with gingivitis were randomly assigned to control (toothbrushing) and experimental (toothbrushing + water flossing) groups (n = 35). Participants were recalled at 4, 8, and 12 weeks, and their gingival index, sulcus bleeding index, bleeding on probing, dental plaque index, and oral malodor values were measured. The microbiota of supragingival plaque was further investigated using 16S rRNA sequencing and qPCR.

RESULTS

Sixty-three participants completed all revisits (control: n = 33; experimental: n = 30). The experimental and control groups exhibited similar clinical characteristics and dental plaque microbiota at baseline. Adjunctive water flossing effectively reduced the gingival index and sulcus bleeding index as compared to the toothbrushing control group. The water-flossing group showed reduced oral malodor at week 12 as compared to the baseline. Consistently, the water-flossing group exhibited altered dental plaque microbiota at week 12, characterized by a depletion of Prevotella at genus level and Prevotella intermedia at species level as compared to the toothbrushing control. In addition, the plaque microbiota of water-flossing group exhibited a more aerobic phenotype, while the control group was more anaerobic.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily water flossing can effectively alleviate gingival inflammation and reduce oral malodor, possibly by depleting oral anaerobes and altering the oral microbiota to a more aerobic phenotype.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Water flossing adjunctive to toothbrushing effectively alleviated gingival inflammation, representing a promising oral hygiene practice to promote oral health.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=61797 , #ChiCTR2000038508) on September 23, 2020.

Cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with microburst technology in orthodontic patients-a randomized-controlled crossover study

OBJECTIVES

Orthodontic patients struggle with interdental cleaning calling for simpler mechanical devices to reduce the high plaque levels. The present study aimed to compare the cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with that of dental flossing in patients with fixed braces after 4 weeks of home-use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study design is a randomized and single-blinded cross-over study. After 28 days using the products at home, hygiene indices (Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI); gingival bleeding index (GBI)) were compared between test (oral irrigator) and control product (dental floss).

RESULTS

Seventeen adult individuals finalized the study. After 28 days of cleaning with the oral irrigator, RMNPI was 54.96% (46.91-66.05) compared to 52.98% (42.75-65.60) with dental floss (p = 0.029). Subgroup analysis revealed that the higher cleansing efficacy of the dental floss is attributable to buccal and marginal areas. GBI after the test phase with the oral irrigator was 12.96% (7.14-24.31) and statistically significantly higher compared to 8.33% (5.84-15.33) with dental floss (p = 0.030) which could be seen in all subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral irrigators do not remove plaque and reduce gingival bleeding as efficiently as dental floss in easily accessible regions. However, in posterior regions, where the patients struggled with the application of dental floss, the oral irrigator showed similar results.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Oral irrigators should only be recommended to orthodontic patients who cannot use interdental brushes and are not compliant with dental flossing.

The Efficacy and Safety of Oral Irrigator on the Control of Dental Plaque and Gingivitis: A Randomized, Single-Blind, Parallel-Group Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral irrigator (OI) in controlling dental plaque and gingivitis.

METHODS

Ninety participants diagnosed with gingivitis were randomly assigned to two groups, given a toothbrush combined with OI (WaterPik®) (test) or a toothbrush alone (control). The Turesky-Modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (T-QH), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), Bleeding Index (BI), and percentage of sites with bleeding on probing (BOP%) were evaluated at baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 12 weeks. The full analysis set (FAS) and per-protocol set (PPS) were analyzed. Adverse events were recorded through electronic diaries and examinations.

RESULTS

Of the 90 participants, the efficacy was assessed in the following numbers (FAS/PPS): test (45/33) and control (43/38). Compared with the control, MGI, BI, and BOP% were significantly lower in the test group after 4 weeks (4 weeks: p = 0.017, p = 0.001, and p = 0.001, respectively; 8 weeks and 12 weeks: p < 0.001 for all, FAS); T-QH was significantly lower after 8 weeks (8 weeks: p = 0.033; 12 weeks: p = 0.006, FAS). Transient gingival bleeding may be associated with OI. Self-reported pain and dentin hypersensitivity symptoms were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

As adjuncts to toothbrushing, OI demonstrated significantly better efficacy in controlling dental plaque and gingival inflammation with no substantial safety hazards.

Efficacy of power-driven interdental cleaning tools: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the available evidence on the efficacy of power-driven interdental cleaning tools (PDICTs) as an adjunct to tooth brushing compared to tooth brushing alone or tooth brushing combined with any other non-PDICT in terms of interproximal plaque and gingival bleeding reduction in gingivitis patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in three databases until March 20, 2022 with the following main eligibility criteria: (1) randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) with (2) at least 28 days of follow-up in (3) gingivitis patients. Interproximal plaque and bleeding values were defined as the primary outcome variables and used for pair-wise meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs were identified including data from 1258 participants at the final evaluation. Eight studies each investigated the effect of either a liquid-based or mechanical PDICT; one of these studies tested additionally a combined liquid-based and mechanical PDICT. Tooth brushing combined with a liquid-based PDICT compared to tooth brushing alone did not result in better interproximal plaque values but in significantly lower interproximal bleeding values. Tooth brushing combined with either a liquid-based PDICT or with a mechanical PDICT compared to tooth brushing and flossing achieved comparable interproximal plaque and bleeding values. The majority of studies reporting on patient compliance/preference favored the use of a PDICT, and except for a single study, which was reporting soft tissue trauma in two subjects from improper use of a mechanical PDICT, none of the studies reported adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily use of PDICT as an adjunct to tooth brushing significantly reduces interproximal bleeding. This effect appears comparable to that of flossing, while PDICT may achieve higher patient acceptance/compliance.

Health action process approach in oral health behaviour: Target interventions, constructs and groups-A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to systematically map the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA)-based interventions in dentistry in relation to the type of intervention, the target groups and the constructs of the HAPA model that are used in the study and to assess the clinical relevance of the studies.

METHODS

A search in the databases of the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE-PubMed), PsychINFO and Cochrane-CENTRAL was conducted. A quality assessment to estimate the risk of bias and a qualitative descriptive analysis were performed. The overall gathered evidence was graded.

RESULTS

Ten randomized controlled trials and three observational studies thus in total 13 studies were included. Flossing was the targeted behaviour in ten studies. The target groups consisted of students, adolescents and dental patients. Overall, all nine HAPA constructs were used, but only one study used all HAPA constructs. Six studies presented the used behavioural change techniques according to the BCT taxonomy. Based on the number of the used constructs, only two studies were classified as HAPA intervention studies. The most frequently used constructs were action control as an intervention and behaviour as an outcome measure. The overall evidence was graded with moderate certainty.

CONCLUSION

In the majority of the studies, the targeted intervention was flossing and the population consisted of students, adolescents and dental patients. All studies used only a selection of the HAPA constructs. Therefore, only a minority of the studies can be considered real HAPA intervention studies.

Repeated Daily Use of Dual-Light Antibacterial Photodynamic Therapy in Periodontal Disease—A Case Report

Good oral hygiene at home is the foundation for optimal treatment response and long-term periodontal disease control. Antibacterial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) provides a very potent adjunctive treatment for plaque control. However, the literature regarding repeated aPDT use is sparse. aPDT has been a modality applied mainly in the dental office environment, and when applied once a year or every few months, the results have been usually disappointing. Recently, LED development has brought aPDT for repeated and practical use at home. We present the very positive results and clinical outcome of daily applied dual-light aPDT-technology treatment in conjunction with mechanical cleaning of a 78-year-old male patient with severe periodontal disease (Stage IV and Grade B).

A Randomized Controlled Trial for Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Oral Irrigator and Interdental Floss for Plaque Control in Children with Visual Impairment

Aim

To evaluate the effectiveness of oral irrigator and interdental floss as adjuncts to manual tooth brushing in 8-16 years old children with visual impairment.

Materials and methods

A three-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment was carried out with the inclusion of 90 institutionalized children with visual impairment of age 8-16 years. They were equally allocated to three groups: group I: tooth brushing along with interdental flossing, group II: brushing along with a powered oral irrigator, and group III: brushing alone (control). Baseline oral hygiene index-simplified (OHI-S), gingival index (GI), and plaque index (PI) scores were recorded for all the samples and compared with post-intervention scores at 14 and 28 days intervals. Repeated measures of analysis of variance (ANOVA), one-way ANOVA, and post hoc Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results

At 28 days interval, children in group II showed a highly statistically significant reduction in OHI-S (0.46; p = 0.0001), PI (0.16; p = 0.0001), and GI (0.24; p = 0.0001) scores compared to control group. They also showed a significant reduction in OHI-S (0.25; p = 0.018), PI (0.15; p = 0.011), and GI (0.15; p = 0.0001) scores compared to group I. There is no significant reduction in the scores of children of group I compared to control group except for the GI score (0.08; p = 0.02).

Conclusion

Oral hygiene maintenance using oral irrigator along with brushing was found to be more effective in visually challenged children. Interdental flossing, along with brushing and brushing alone was found to be less effective.

Clinical significance

This study underlines the fact that comprehensive oral hygiene care should include interdental cleaning aids for effective plaque control to prevent dental diseases in children with visual impairment. Since these children have less manual dexterity to perform good oral hygiene practices, electrically driven interdental cleaning aids like oral irrigator may help them to overcome the problem.

How to cite this article

Deepika V, Chandrasekhar R, Uloopi KS, et al. A Randomized Controlled Trial for Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Oral Irrigator and Interdental Floss for Plaque Control in Children with Visual Impairment. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022;15(4):389-393.

Interdental plaque reduction after use of different devices in patients with periodontitis and interdental recession: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of four different oral hygiene protocols involving adjunctive interdental devices in terms of plaque and bleeding scores in periodontitis-affected patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a randomized clinical trial with a 5-week follow-up, including previously treated periodontitis-patients not undergoing any supportive care. Patients were randomly allocated to 4 groups: manual toothbrush (group TB); toothbrush plus dental floss (group TB/F); toothbrush plus interdental brushes (group TB/IDB); toothbrush plus rubber interdental picks (group TB/RIDB). Oral hygiene instructions (OHI) were provided at baseline (T-7) and at T0 (1-week) then bi-weekly (T14/T28). At T0 (supragingival professional cleaning was delivered. Plaque and bleeding indexes were taken at all time-points by a single calibrated examiner, blind to group allocation.

RESULTS

At T-7 patients were comparable for age, body mass index (BMI), and all clinical parameters, exceptions for the Interdental Angulated Bleeding Index. At T28, significant reductions of plaque and gingival inflammation were noted in all groups (p<0.001) and within the expected ranges. Intergroup comparisons identified that group TB/IDB and group TB/RIDB achieved lower levels of plaque and inflammation than group TB (p<0.05). Group TB/IDB and group TB/RIDB showed lower levels of plaque and lower inflammation as measured by angulated bleeding index than group TB/RIDB (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Interdental brushes and rubber interdental picks were more efficient than toothbrushing alone and toothbrushing and floss in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation measured in a periodontitis-affected population.

Patients' opinion on the use of 2 generations of power-driven water flossers and their impact on gingival inflammation

Objectives

To assess patients' opinion on the use of 2 generations of power‐driven water flossers and their impact on gingival inflammation.

Material & Methods

In the present prospective cohort study 24 periodontitis patients under regular supportive periodontal therapy used daily 2 generations of a power‐driven water flosser (Sonicare AirFloss [SAF] and Sonicare AirFloss Ultra [SAFU]) for 12 weeks each. Patients were instructed to position the nozzle interproximally from the buccal aspect at each interproximal space. Patients' opinion was assessed by a questionnaire and interproximal bleeding on probing (BoP) was recorded.

Results

Overall satisfaction with SAF/SAFU was rated high, by about 80% of the patients. About 66% of the patients preferred SAF/SAFU compared to their previous interdental cleaning device and indicated that they would continue using SAF/SAFU after the study; none of the patients reported any discomfort or pain. Compared to only tooth brushing, daily use of SAF/SAFU caused a significant reduction of interproximal BoP values, which were well maintained over 6 months; that is, BoP at interproximal buccal and oral sites (pooled), as well as at interproximal buccal and oral sites separately, was proportionately reduced by 29.1%, 41.2%, and 24.8%, respectively (pooled: p = 0.027; buccal sites: p = 0.030; oral sites: p = 0.030).

Conclusion

Patients were very fond of the power‐driven water flossers tested herein, and daily use of the devices for 6 months (i.e., each device was used for 3 months) resulted in a significant reduction of gingival inflammation interproximally.

Mechanical plaque removal of periodontal maintenance patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIM

This systematic review synthesizes the available clinical evidence concerning efficacy of mechanical oral hygiene devices in periodontal maintenance patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three databases were searched up to October 2019 for clinical trials conducted in adult patients in periodontal maintenance which evaluated the effect of toothbrushes or an interdental device on plaque removal and parameters of periodontal diseases. Descriptive analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed.

RESULTS

Sixteen eligible publications, including 17 relevant comparisons, were retrieved. Four out of five comparisons found no clinical difference between a manual and power toothbrush. Of the interdental cleaning devices, the interdental brushes (IDBs) reduced plaque scores more effectively than a manual toothbrush alone. For the oral irrigator, two out of three comparisons indicated a positive effect on gingivitis scores, and probing pocket depth. The NMA demonstrated that for plaque removal the adjuvant use of IDBs was significantly more effective than the manual toothbrush alone. For the reduction of gingival inflammation, no product ranked higher than the manual toothbrush.

CONCLUSION

Due to the scarcity of studies that met the inclusion criteria for each of the oral hygiene devices and the low certainty of the resultant evidence, no strong "evidence-based" conclusion can be drawn concerning any specific oral hygiene device for patient self-care in periodontal maintenance.

Contemporary practices for mechanical oral hygiene to prevent periodontal disease

It is well established that dental plaque on teeth leads to gingivitis and periodontitis, and that several mechanical and chemical methods of plaque control can prevent gingivitis. The aim of the current review is to summarize and synthesize the available scientific evidence supporting practices for mechanical oral hygiene to prevent periodontal diseases. Evidence for contemporary practices of mechanical oral hygiene to prevent periodontal disease relies on studies of gingivitis patients. General recommendations concerning the ideal oral hygiene devices and procedures are still inconclusive. However, toothbrushing and interdental cleaning remain the mainstays of prevention of periodontal diseases. The primary approach requires individually tailored instruction for implementation of a systematic oral hygiene regimen.

Bayesian Network Meta-analysis of Multiple Outcomes in Dental Research

OBJECTIVES

Dental research typically targets multiple outcomes. Interdental cleaning devices such as interdental brushes (IB) and water jet devices (WJ) share a sizable portion of the medical device market. However, recommendations for device selection are limited by the conflicting evidence from multiple outcomes in available studies and the lack of an appropriate synthesis approach to summarize evidences taken from multiple outcomes. In particular, both pairwise meta-analyses and single-outcome network meta-analyses can give discordant results. The purpose of this multioutcome, Bayesian network meta-analysis is to introduce this innovative method to the dental research community using data from interdental cleaning device studies for illustrative purposes.

METHODS

We reanalyzed a network meta-analysis of interproximal oral hygiene methods in the reduction of clinical indices of inflammation, which included 22 trials assessing 10 interproximal oral hygiene aids. We focused on the primary outcome of gingival inflammation, which was measured by 2 correlated outcome variables, the Gingival Index (GI) and bleeding on probing (BOP).

RESULTS

In our previous single-outcome analysis, we concluded that IB and WJ rank high for reducing gingival inflammation while toothpick and flossing rank last. In this multioutcome Bayesian network meta-analysis with equal weight on GI and BOP, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve was 0.87 for WJ and 0.85 for IB. WJ and IB remained ranked as the 2 best devices across different sets of weightings for the GI and BOP.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, multioutcome Bayesian network meta-analysis naturally takes the correlations among multiple outcomes into account, which in turn can provide more comprehensive evidence.

Effects of interdental cleaning devices in preventing dental caries and periodontal diseases: a scoping review

To identify and map existing evidence on the effectiveness of interdental cleaning devices in preventing dental caries and periodontal diseases, a scoping review was carried out by electronically searching PubMed, Scopus and Embase. Studies on interdental cleaning devices, written in English, and published from January 2008 up to April 2019 were included in the review. Of 1860 studies identified, six systematic reviews (SR) were included in the review. One SR each was on flossing, interdental brushes, wood sticks and oral irrigation. Of two SR on multitude of interdental cleaning devices, one assessed comparative efficacy while the other both the individual and comparative efficacy. All reviews had assessed the heterogeneity and the methodological quality of studies included, and performed data extraction and meta-analysis where appropriate. Evidence ranged from weak to moderate with very low- to low-certainty for the adjunctive benefit of these devices to control plaque and gingivitis. It warrants long-term studies with sufficient power and those assessing the impact of interdental cleaning on interproximal caries to corroborate such evidence. Available evidence on the efficacy of interdental cleaning devices suggests that dental practitioners recommend patient-specific interdental cleaning devices that enable patients to achieve a safe and high standard of interdental cleaning.

A network meta-analysis of interproximal oral hygiene methods in the reduction of clinical indices of inflammation

BACKGROUND

A wide selection of Interdental Oral Hygiene (IOH) aids is available to consumers. Recommendations for selection are, however, limited by the lack of direct comparisons in available studies. We aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of IOH aids using Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis (BNMA).

METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed a systematic literature review of randomized clinical trials assessing IOH aids, based on a focused question. Gingival inflammation (Gingival Index (GI), Bleeding-on-probing (BOP)) was the primary outcome and plaque and probing depth were secondary outcomes A random-effects arm-based BNMA model was run for each outcome; posterior medians and 95% credible-intervals (CIs) summarized marginal distributions of parameters.

RESULTS

A two-phase selection process identified 22 trials assessing 10 IOH aids as brushing adjuncts. Interdental brushes (IB) yielded the largest reduction in GI (0.23 [95% CI: 0.09, 0.37]) as toothbrushing adjuncts, followed by water-jet (WJ) (0.19 [95% CI: 0.14, 0.24]). Rankings based on posterior probabilities revealed that IB and WJ had the highest probability of being "best" (64.7% and 27.4%, respectively) for GI reduction, whereas the probability for toothpick and floss being the "best" IOH aids was near zero. Notably, except for toothpicks, all IOH aids were better at reducing GI as compared with control.

CONCLUSIONS

BNMA enabled us to quantitatively evaluate IOH aids and provide a global ranking of their efficacy. Interdental brushes and water-jets ranked high for reducing gingival bleeding, whereas toothpicks and floss ranked last. The patient-perceived benefit of IOH aids is not clear because gingival inflammation measures are physical indicators of periodontal health.

Determination of sialic acid levels by using surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy in periodontitis and gingivitis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the sialic acid (SA) levels in saliva among periodontitis-affected, gingivitis and control patients.

METHODS

The study involved 93 subjects. The participants were divided into three groups: (1) 30 subjects without periodontal disease (control group); (2) 30 subjects with gingivitis; and (3) 33 subjects with periodontitis. The oral parameters examined were as follows: (a) Simplified Oral Hygiene Index; (b) Calculus Index; (c) Gingival Index; (d) probing pocket depth; and (e) level of epithelial attachment. SA levels in saliva were measured by means of surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS). This method has demonstrated the capacity to detect extremely low concentrations of molecules. The spectrum was calibrated using analytical reagent SA.

RESULTS

The obtained median values for SA concentrations were 5.98, 7.32, and 17.12 mg/dl for control, gingivitis, and periodontitis patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our measurements by SERS corroborate that in periodontitis-affected patients, the SA concentration is larger than their concentrations in either control or gingivitis patients. This confirms previous reports and opens the possibility of using SERS as a diagnostic tool.

Local drug delivery systems in the management of periodontitis: A scientific review

Periodontitis (PD) is a microbial disease of tooth supporting tissues that results in progressive destruction of surrounding soft and hard tissues with eventual tooth mobility and exfoliation. Perioceutics, which includes the delivery of therapeutic agents via systemic and local means as an adjunct to mechanical therapy has revolutionized the arena of periodontal therapy. Selection of a right antimicrobial agent with appropriate route of drug administration is the key to successful periodontal therapy. Irrigating systems, fibers, gels, strips, films, microparticles, nanoparticles and low dose antimicrobial agents are some of the local drug delivery systems (LDDS) available in the field, which aims to deliver antimicrobial agents to sub-gingival diseased sites with minimal or no side-effects on other body sites. The present review aim to summarize the current state-of-the-art technology on LDDS in periodontal therapy ensuring the the practitioners are able to choose LDD agents which are custom made for a specific clinical condition.

An Overview of Different Interdental Cleaning Aids and Their Effectiveness

Optimisation of plaque control is essential for the success of non-surgical and surgical periodontal therapy. This cannot be achieved with brushing alone; hence, there is a need for adjunctive interdental cleaning aids. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of different interdental cleaning aids and review the literature for consensus on their effectiveness. A literature search of articles in English, up to December 2018, was conducted in Pubmed. High-quality flossing is difficult to achieve, and ineffective routine use of floss may not confer significant benefits over brushing alone. Interdental brushes are more effective than brushing as a monotherapy. They are at least as good if not superior to floss in reducing plaque and gingivitis. Although they are effective for patients regardless of their periodontal status (healthy or active), they are especially indicated in periodontal patients where widened embrasures are common. Added benefits include ease of use, patient acceptance, and recontouring of interdental tissues. Rubberpiks do not demonstrate inferiority to conventional interdental brushes. Wooden interdental aids appear to offer no significant advantage over brushing with respect to plaque removal; they may, however, reduce gingival bleeding. Oral irrigators are a promising tool for reducing gingival inflammation, despite minimal changes to plaque levels. For cleaning around dental implants, oral irrigators and interdental brushes are preferred over floss.

A randomized controlled trial of a power brush/irrigator/mouthrinse routine on plaque and gingivitis reduction in orthodontic patients

OBJECTIVES

To assess plaque and gingivitis reduction in orthodontic patients after 4 weeks' use of an oscillating-rotating power brush, irrigator, and mouthrinse.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, examiner-blind, clinical trial comparing plaque and gingivitis outcomes for an experimental power brush/irrigator/mouthrinse oral hygiene routine vs a dental prophylaxis followed by regular manual brushing (positive control). Fifty-one participants with fixed orthodontic appliances in the upper and lower jaw and a minimum of 15 gingival bleeding sites were randomly assigned to experimental or positive control treatment. Both groups were instructed to use their products at least twice daily. At baseline, week 1, and week 4, plaque was evaluated using digital plaque imaging analysis and a conventional subjective index. Gingival inflammation and bleeding were also measured. Analysis of covariance was used to compare groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-one participants (mean age = 13.9 years) were randomized; 50 (25 per group) completed the study. At baseline, group means were not statistically different (P > .1) for gingival inflammation or bleeding. At week 4, the experimental and control groups had a 10.0% to 32.7% and 5.9% to 6.7% reduction vs baseline, respectively, in plaque (across both methods); 12.6% and 8.3% reduction, respectively, in gingival inflammation; and 50.6% and 37.8% reduction, respectively, in bleeding. At week 4, group differences favoring the experimental group were statistically significant (P < .05) for gingival inflammation, gingival bleeding, and plaque (by conventional and digital imaging indexes).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a power brush/irrigator/mouthrinse resulted in statistically significantly greater plaque and gingivitis reductions than prophylaxis followed by manual brushing in patients with fixed appliances over 4 weeks.

Home use of interdental cleaning devices, in addition to toothbrushing, for preventing and controlling periodontal diseases and dental caries

BACKGROUND

Dental caries (tooth decay) and periodontal diseases (gingivitis and periodontitis) affect the majority of people worldwide, and treatment costs place a significant burden on health services. Decay and gum disease can cause pain, eating and speaking difficulties, low self-esteem, and even tooth loss and the need for surgery. As dental plaque is the primary cause, self-administered daily mechanical disruption and removal of plaque is important for oral health. Toothbrushing can remove supragingival plaque on the facial and lingual/palatal surfaces, but special devices (such as floss, brushes, sticks, and irrigators) are often recommended to reach into the interdental area.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of interdental cleaning devices used at home, in addition to toothbrushing, compared with toothbrushing alone, for preventing and controlling periodontal diseases, caries, and plaque. A secondary objective was to compare different interdental cleaning devices with each other.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 16 January 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 12), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 January 2019), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 January 2019) and CINAHL EBSCO (1937 to 16 January 2019). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared toothbrushing and a home-use interdental cleaning device versus toothbrushing alone or with another device (minimum duration four weeks).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently screened searches, selected studies, extracted data, assessed studies' risk of bias, and assessed evidence certainty as high, moderate, low or very low, according to GRADE. We extracted indices measured on interproximal surfaces, where possible. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses, using mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 35 RCTs (3929 randomised adult participants). Studies were at high risk of performance bias as blinding of participants was not possible. Only two studies were otherwise at low risk of bias. Many participants had a low level of baseline gingival inflammation.Studies evaluated the following devices plus toothbrushing versus toothbrushing: floss (15 trials), interdental brushes (2 trials), wooden cleaning sticks (2 trials), rubber/elastomeric cleaning sticks (2 trials), oral irrigators (5 trials). Four devices were compared with floss: interdental brushes (9 trials), wooden cleaning sticks (3 trials), rubber/elastomeric cleaning sticks (9 trials) and oral irrigators (2 trials). Another comparison was rubber/elastomeric cleaning sticks versus interdental brushes (3 trials).No trials assessed interproximal caries, and most did not assess periodontitis. Gingivitis was measured by indices (most commonly, Löe-Silness, 0 to 3 scale) and by proportion of bleeding sites. Plaque was measured by indices, most often Quigley-Hein (0 to 5).

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

comparisons against toothbrushing aloneLow-certainty evidence suggested that flossing, in addition to toothbrushing, may reduce gingivitis (measured by gingival index (GI)) at one month (SMD -0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.12 to -0.04; 8 trials, 585 participants), three months or six months. The results for proportion of bleeding sites and plaque were inconsistent (very low-certainty evidence).Very low-certainty evidence suggested that using an interdental brush, plus toothbrushing, may reduce gingivitis (measured by GI) at one month (MD -0.53, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.23; 1 trial, 62 participants), though there was no clear difference in bleeding sites (MD -0.05, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.03; 1 trial, 31 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggested interdental brushes may reduce plaque more than toothbrushing alone (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.63; 2 trials, 93 participants).Very low-certainty evidence suggested that using wooden cleaning sticks, plus toothbrushing, may reduce bleeding sites at three months (MD -0.25, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.13; 1 trial, 24 participants), but not plaque (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.07).Very low-certainty evidence suggested that using rubber/elastomeric interdental cleaning sticks, plus toothbrushing, may reduce plaque at one month (MD -0.22, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.03), but this was not found for gingivitis (GI MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.21; 1 trial, 12 participants; bleeding MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.01; 1 trial, 30 participants).Very-low certainty evidence suggested oral irrigators may reduce gingivitis measured by GI at one month (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.06; 4 trials, 380 participants), but not at three or six months. Low-certainty evidence suggested that oral irrigators did not reduce bleeding sites at one month (MD -0.00, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.06; 2 trials, 126 participants) or three months, or plaque at one month (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.10; 3 trials, 235 participants), three months or six months, more than toothbrushing alone.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVE

comparisons between devicesLow-certainty evidence suggested interdental brushes may reduce gingivitis more than floss at one and three months, but did not show a difference for periodontitis measured by probing pocket depth. Evidence for plaque was inconsistent.Low- to very low-certainty evidence suggested oral irrigation may reduce gingivitis at one month compared to flossing, but very low-certainty evidence did not suggest a difference between devices for plaque.Very low-certainty evidence for interdental brushes or flossing versus interdental cleaning sticks did not demonstrate superiority of either intervention.Adverse eventsStudies that measured adverse events found no severe events caused by devices, and no evidence of differences between study groups in minor effects such as gingival irritation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Using floss or interdental brushes in addition to toothbrushing may reduce gingivitis or plaque, or both, more than toothbrushing alone. Interdental brushes may be more effective than floss. Available evidence for tooth cleaning sticks and oral irrigators is limited and inconsistent. Outcomes were mostly measured in the short term and participants in most studies had a low level of baseline gingival inflammation. Overall, the evidence was low to very low-certainty, and the effect sizes observed may not be clinically important. Future trials should report participant periodontal status according to the new periodontal diseases classification, and last long enough to measure interproximal caries and periodontitis.

[Oral and periodontal hygiene in orthodontic patients]

INTRODUCTION

Orthodontic appliances promote dental plaque retention and make tooth-brushing less easy. They result in both quantitative and qualitative changes in dental plaque, exposing orthodontic patients to dental caries and periodontal diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors explain the effects of orthodontic treatments on dental plaque and the occurrence of dental and periodontal problems; they emphasize the role of pathogenic bacteria and highlight the need for efficient (both individual and professional) control of dental plaque.

DISCUSSION

Therefore, orthodontists have to educate their patients on oral and periodontal hygiene in order to control this bacterial factor and to avoid the occurrence of dental and/or periodontal complications.

Effect of supragingival oral irrigation as an adjunct to toothbrushing on plaque accumulation in chronic generalized gingivitis patients

Aim:

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of supragingival oral irrigation either with water or different concentrations of chlorhexidine (CHX) digluconate as an adjunct to toothbrushing on plaque accumulation in chronic generalized gingivitis patients.

Materials and Methods:

Fifty patients were randomly allocated into five groups. Group 1: toothbrushing alone, Group 2: toothbrushing with mouthwash, Group 3: toothbrushing with water irrigation, Group 4: toothbrushing with 0.0075% CHX digluconate (36 mg) supragingival irrigation, and Group 5: toothbrushing with 0.02% CHX digluconate (96 mg) supragingival irrigation. The collected data were subjected to statistical analysis.

Statistical Analysis:

Descriptive data were obtained for all outcome variables and reported as mean ± standard deviation. The Student's t-test, Chi-square test, and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were applied for the statistical evaluation of means and comparisons of proportions, and post hoc Bonferroni test was used for multiple comparisons after the application of the ANOVA test for comparison within the groups.

Results:

When intergroup difference of the mean differences was compared for individuals using toothbrushing along with 0.0075% CHX digluconate irrigation and those using toothbrushing along with 0.02% CHX digluconate irrigation from BL-14, BL-28, and between 14 and 28 days, it was found to be statistically nonsignificant.

Conclusions:

In our study, the CHX digluconate concentration for mouthwash and oral irrigation in addition with toothbrushing was found to be same, i.e., <50 mg for improving the gingival health by reducing gingival inflammation.

Interdental plaque reduction after use of different devices in young subjects with intact papilla: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of 4 different oral hygiene regimens involving adjunctive interdental cleaning devices in unsupervised young subjects with intact interdental papilla.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty periodontally healthy subjects were randomly allocated to 4 groups following different oral hygiene regimens (T-7): use of manual toothbrush alone; manual toothbrush plus dental floss; manual toothbrush plus interdental brushes; and manual toothbrush plus rubber interdental picks. Oral hygiene instructions (OHI) were given. One week after (T0), professional supragingival scaling and polishing was performed, and subjects were then reseen every 2 weeks (T14 and T28). At T-7, T0, T14 and T28, full-mouth plaque score (FMPS), full-mouth bleeding score (FMBS) and angulated bleeding index (AngBI) were taken.

RESULTS

During the first week (T-7/T0 unclean phase), FMPS decreased significantly in all groups except the group using dental floss. At T28, a significant decrease in FMPS (P < .001, all groups) and FMBS (P < .05, all groups except the group using flossing P < .001) was noted. Interdental FMPS showed significantly lower values in subjects treated with interdental brushes or rubber interdental picks vs toothbrushing alone (P < .05). The use of interdental picks was associated with reduced interdental FMBS when compared to flossing (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

In young subjects, with no interdental attachment loss, toothbrushing or toothbrushing and adjunctive interdental cleaning devices such as dental floss, interdental brushes or interdental rubber picks can significantly reduce both plaque and gingival inflammation. Use of interdental brushes or rubber picks reduces more interdental plaque in comparison with toothbrushing alone.

Effectiveness of flossing loops in the control of the gingival health

Background

One of the key factor in the good condition of periodontal tissues is their daily hygiene. Oral hygiene techniques such brushing and a good interdental hygiene by correct flossing are very important. The aim of this study is to compare the use of dental floss in a loop vs traditional floss in the control of Loe-Silness Gingival Index (IG), Turesky´s Plaque Index (IPT), Gingival Bleeding Index (IS) and the values of interleukin 6 (IL-6) and interleukin 8 (IL-8).

Material and Methods

A comparative study of 40 patients in which each patient was his own control, using during 45 days each one of the devices (new loop floss and conventional floss) of interdental hygiene analysed. Data for Loe-Silness Gingival Index (IG), Turesky´s Plaque Index (IPT), Gingival Bleeding Index (IS) and the values of interleukin 6 (IL-6) and interleukin 8 (IL-8)were collected and measured in every visit for every type of interdental hygiene device.

Results

Our data indicates that the rate of Turesky´s Plaque Index presented statistically significant differences between groups (loop: 1.66 ± 0.8; traditional: 1.12 ± 0.8; p<0.0001). The rest of the indices studied showed no statistically significant differences.

Conclusions

The creation of new dental floss designs try to make their use easier and more sensitive, and plaque removal more effective. The loop design can facilitate interdental hygiene, reaching similar effectiveness than traditional floss, improving some indicators, such as Turesky´s Plaque Index.

Key words:Dental floss, bacterial plaque, loop floss, plaque index, periodontal diseases.

Efficacy of inter-dental mechanical plaque control in managing gingivitis--a meta-review

FOCUSED QUESTION

What is the effect of mechanical inter-dental plaque removal in addition to toothbrushing, on managing gingivitis using various formats of inter-dental self-care in adults based on evidence gathered from existing systematic reviews?

MATERIAL & METHODS

Three Internet sources were searched by a strategy designed to include systematic reviews on inter-dental cleaning devices. Plaque and gingivitis scores were the primary parameters of interest. Characteristics of selected papers were extracted. The potential risk of bias was estimated and the acquired evidence was graded.

RESULTS

Screening of 395 papers resulted in six systematic reviews. Two papers evaluated the efficacy of dental floss, two of inter-dental brushes (IDB), one of woodsticks and one of the oral irrigator. Weak evidence of unclear or small magnitude was retrieved that supported dental floss, woodsticks and the oral irrigator to reduce gingivitis in addition to toothbrushing. No concomitant evidence for an effect on plaque emerged. There is moderate evidence that IDBs in combination with toothbrushing reduce both plaque and gingivitis.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests that inter-dental cleaning with IDBs is the most effective method for inter-dental plaque removal. The majority of available studies fail to demonstrate that flossing is generally effective in plaque removal. All investigated devices for inter-dental self-care seem to support the management of gingivitis, however, to a varying extend.

Effect on plaque control in children patients with Down syndrome using Digital Brush with or without chlorhexidine: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy in children affected by Down syndrome of "Digital Brush" in terms of Plaque Index reduction added to the daily oral hygiene procedures.

METHODS

A total of 56 patients with Down syndrome were recruited and randomly assigned in two groups: both control and test groups underwent standard hygiene procedures of tooth brushing twice a day followed by the intervention of Digital Brush, TNT gauze impregnated with chlorhexidine 0.12%, for the test group and by sterile gauze soaked in water for the control group. Initial plaque index was measured for all patients (T0), subsequently were instructed to use either Digital Brush or gauze soaked with water for 2 weeks. At last, patients were reevaluated (T1) and the plaque index measured.

RESULTS

Plaque index improvement from T0 to T1 in control group was 11.7%, while in test group was 24.1%. The mean differences between test and control group was statistically significant (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates how the Digital Brush, added to the daily oral hygiene procedures, obtains significant improvements in supragingival plaque control in children with Down syndrome.

Defining periodontal health

Assessment of the periodontium has relied exclusively on a variety of physical measurements (e.g., attachment level, probing depth, bone loss, mobility, recession, degree of inflammation, etc.) in relation to various case definitions of periodontal disease. Periodontal health was often an afterthought and was simply defined as the absence of the signs and symptoms of a periodontal disease. Accordingly, these strict and sometimes disparate definitions of periodontal disease have resulted in an idealistic requirement of a pristine periodontium for periodontal health, which makes us all diseased in one way or another. Furthermore, the consequence of not having a realistic definition of health has resulted in potentially questionable recommendations. The aim of this manuscript was to assess the biological, environmental, sociological, economic, educational and psychological relationships that are germane to constructing a paradigm that defines periodontal health using a modified wellness model. The paradigm includes four cardinal characteristics, i.e., 1) a functional dentition, 2) the painless function of a dentition, 3) the stability of the periodontal attachment apparatus, and 4) the psychological and social well-being of the individual. Finally, strategies and policies that advocate periodontal health were appraised.

I'm not sick but I'm not well,

and it's a sin to live so well.

Flagpole Sitta, Harvey Danger

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.

[Plaque control, a key element of successful orthodontics]

It is mainly because of periodontal tissues and, more particularly, the periodontal ligament that the orthodontist is able to move teeth. According the ratio cost/benefit/security, the orthodontist needs to prevent and/or to avoid the deleterious effects of its treatments on periodontal tissues. Gingival inflammation with a high hyperplasia compound, periodontal attachment loss, bone loss and root resorption may result, in absolute value, in a reduction of periodontal support. The key to prevent these problems is plaque control, phase too often neglected. The challenge before any orthodontic treatment, both in children or in adults, is to change the behavior of the patient concerning the mouth and the dental plaque. The aim of this paper is to explore the evidence based literature (systematic revues, meta-analysis), to provide thought elements and concrete proposals to definitely resolve this critical phase of orthodontic treatment that is the motivation, phase that can also be achieved by "dental auxiliaries".