OBJECTIVES: To assess plaque and gingivitis reduction in orthodontic patients after 4 weeks' use of anoscillating-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.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To assess plaque and gingivitis reduction in orthodonticpatients 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.
Entities:
Keywords:
Gingivitis; Irrigator; Mouthrinse; Orthodontic patients; Plaque reduction; Power toothbrush
Authors: Malgorzata Klukowska; Annike Bader; Christina Erbe; Philip Bellamy; Donald J White; Mary Kay Anastasia; Heiner Wehrbein Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: P G Robinson; S A Deacon; C Deery; M Heanue; A D Walmsley; H V Worthington; A M Glenny; W C Shaw Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2005-04-18