OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of three manual toothbrushes on dental plaque and gingival inflammation. METHODS: The elmex Sensitive Extra Soft (ESES), elmex Sensitive Soft (ESS) and an ADA standard toothbrush (ADAS) were evaluated in a randomized clinical trial. Subjects brushed twice daily in their usual manner. Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI) and plaque and gingival scores of interproximal spaces (IntPI and IntGI) were evaluated at day 15 and day 30. ANOVA and t-test were used to compare plaque and gingival scores. RESULTS: A total of 84 subjects with mild to moderate gingivitis completed the study. Plaque and gingival scores in ESES and ESS groups decreased from baseline to day 15 and day 30. At day 30, subjects in both ESES and ESS groups had lower plaque and gingival scores than those in the ADAS group (p<0.05). In the ESES group, PI reduced by 13.6% (p<0.0001), and GI by 10.5% (p<0.0001) at day 30 when compared to the baseline scores. In the ESS group, PI reduced by 11.8% (p<0.0001), and GI by 12.0% (p<0.0001) at day 30. The reduction in IntPI and IntGI scores were comparable to those of the overall PI and GI. In contrast, there were no changes in PI, GI, and IntPI and IntGI scores between baseline and the day 15 and day 30 evaluations in the ADAS group. CONCLUSIONS: Both the ESES and ESS toothbrushes are more effective in removing dental plaque and reducing gingival inflammation than the ADA standard toothbrush.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of three manual toothbrushes on dental plaque and gingival inflammation. METHODS: The elmex Sensitive Extra Soft (ESES), elmex Sensitive Soft (ESS) and an ADA standard toothbrush (ADAS) were evaluated in a randomized clinical trial. Subjects brushed twice daily in their usual manner. Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI) and plaque and gingival scores of interproximal spaces (IntPI and IntGI) were evaluated at day 15 and day 30. ANOVA and t-test were used to compare plaque and gingival scores. RESULTS: A total of 84 subjects with mild to moderate gingivitis completed the study. Plaque and gingival scores in ESES and ESS groups decreased from baseline to day 15 and day 30. At day 30, subjects in both ESES and ESS groups had lower plaque and gingival scores than those in the ADAS group (p<0.05). In the ESES group, PI reduced by 13.6% (p<0.0001), and GI by 10.5% (p<0.0001) at day 30 when compared to the baseline scores. In the ESS group, PI reduced by 11.8% (p<0.0001), and GI by 12.0% (p<0.0001) at day 30. The reduction in IntPI and IntGI scores were comparable to those of the overall PI and GI. In contrast, there were no changes in PI, GI, and IntPI and IntGI scores between baseline and the day 15 and day 30 evaluations in the ADAS group. CONCLUSIONS: Both the ESES and ESS toothbrushes are more effective in removing dental plaque and reducing gingival inflammation than the ADA standard toothbrush.
Authors: Martijn P C Van Leeuwen; Fridus A Van der Weijden; Dagmar Else Slot; Martijn A M Rosema Journal: Int J Dent Hyg Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 2.477
Authors: Maria Faus-Damiá; Marta Segarra-Vidal; Eduardo Lucas-Alcahuz; Andrés López-Roldán; Francisco Gil-Loscos; Francisco Alpiste-Illueca Journal: J Clin Exp Dent Date: 2015-10-01