AIM: To determine the efficacy of a rubber bristles interdental cleaner (RBIC) compared to an interdental brush (IDB) in reducing gingivitis and additionally to evaluate participants' attitudes and possible side effects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was a 2-treatment, parallel, split-mouth, examiner-blind RCT, evaluating the reversal of experimental gingivitis. In total, 42 systemically healthy volunteers were recruited that were currently non-users of interdental cleaning devices. After familiarization and prophylaxis, participants refrained from brushing mandibular teeth for 21 days, followed by 4-week product use of the assigned interdental cleaning device as adjunct to manual toothbrushing. Bleeding on marginal probing (BOMP), dental plaque index score (PI) and gingival abrasion score (GAs) were assessed in the lower jaw. RESULTS: Overall, no statistically significant differences between the RBIC and IDB in reducing BOMP and PI were obtained. Analysing the sites that were accessible for the RBIC/IDB only showed that the sites treated with the RBIC had significantly less BOMP after 4 weeks (P = .009). The RBIC also caused less GAs (P => .016) and was considered more pleasurable to use by the participants (P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In accessible sites, the RBIC, in conjunction with manual toothbrushing, was found to be more effective in reducing gingival inflammation after 4 weeks. The RBIC caused less abrasion of the gingiva and was appreciated more by the participants.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To determine the efficacy of a rubber bristles interdental cleaner (RBIC) compared to an interdental brush (IDB) in reducing gingivitis and additionally to evaluate participants' attitudes and possible side effects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was a 2-treatment, parallel, split-mouth, examiner-blind RCT, evaluating the reversal of experimental gingivitis. In total, 42 systemically healthy volunteers were recruited that were currently non-users of interdental cleaning devices. After familiarization and prophylaxis, participants refrained from brushing mandibular teeth for 21 days, followed by 4-week product use of the assigned interdental cleaning device as adjunct to manual toothbrushing. Bleeding on marginal probing (BOMP), dental plaque index score (PI) and gingival abrasion score (GAs) were assessed in the lower jaw. RESULTS: Overall, no statistically significant differences between the RBIC and IDB in reducing BOMP and PI were obtained. Analysing the sites that were accessible for the RBIC/IDB only showed that the sites treated with the RBIC had significantly less BOMP after 4 weeks (P = .009). The RBIC also caused less GAs (P => .016) and was considered more pleasurable to use by the participants (P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In accessible sites, the RBIC, in conjunction with manual toothbrushing, was found to be more effective in reducing gingival inflammation after 4 weeks. The RBIC caused less abrasion of the gingiva and was appreciated more by the participants.
Authors: Fridus van der Weijden; Dagmar Else Slot; Eveline van der Sluijs; Nienke Lisette Hennequin-Hoenderdos Journal: Int J Dent Hyg Date: 2021-05-29 Impact factor: 2.725
Authors: Christian Graetz; Kristina Schoepke; Johanna Rabe; Susanne Schorr; Antje Geiken; David Christofzik; Thomas Rinder; Christof E Dörfer; Sonja Sälzer Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2021-04-14 Impact factor: 2.757