Dagmar E Slot1, Cees Valkenburg1,2, G A Fridus Van der Weijden1. 1. Department of Periodontology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. General dentist and clinical epidemiologist, Hoevelaken, The Netherlands.
Abstract
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.
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.
Authors: Gerson Pedro José Langa; Pedro Paulo de Almeida Dantas; Gloria Marcela Ramírez Lemus; Carlos Guillermo Benítez Silva; Jonathan Meza-Mauricio; Francisco Wilker Mustafa Gomes Muniz Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-01-09 Impact factor: 3.606
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
Authors: Lewis Winning; Fionnuala T Lundy; Bronagh Blackwood; Daniel F McAuley; Ikhlas El Karim Journal: Crit Care Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Pune N Paqué; Lamprini Karygianni; Julien Kneubuehler; Lorenzo Fiscalini; Daniel B Wiedemeier; Marcel Müller; Thomas Attin; Thomas Thurnheer Journal: Microbiologyopen Date: 2022-04 Impact factor: 3.904