The impact of toothbrush filament design on gingival health during healing. A randomized, controlled, investigator-blinded clinical trial

• Autorzy: Kovalova E. , Novak B. , Klamarova T. , Eliasova A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Objectives. The primary objective of the study was to test toothbrushes with different types of filaments (conical vs. rounded) with respect to cause gingival abrasion after surgical intervention of wisdom teeth. A secondary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of plaque removal and the improvement of gingival conditions to alleviate wound healing and to avoid gingivitis. Methods. One hundred and seventy-three healthy subjects with surgical intervention of wisdom teeth participated in a randomized, single blind study and were randomly allocated to control group (standard ADA reference toothbrush) or test group (meridol® special toothbrush with conical filaments). Clinical examinations included gingival abrasion, plaque index and gingival index, and were conducted at baseline, 7 and 28 days. Results. For the gingival abrasion the mean number of lesions of all sizes was after 28 days significantly lower in the test group (p-value <0.001) compared to control group. Plaque index was not significantly different between the two groups in the last visit. At day 28 the gingival index was significantly lower in the test group (p=0.031) compared to control group. Conclusions. The toothbrush with conical filaments induced significantly less gingival abrasions than the standard ADA toothbrush and showed superior results in improving gingival health (gingival index). Both toothbrushes were comparable effective with respect to plaque removal. Clinical Relevance. Scientific rationale for study: Supra and sub-gingival biofilm leads to gingival inflammation. Post-surgical removal of the biofilm from gingival surfaces promotes healing after wisdom tooth extraction. Tooth brushing leads to gingival abrasion. Earlier investigations with toothbrushes having conical filaments suggest less gingival tissue damage. Principal findings: The results showed that the toothbrush with conical filaments caused significantly less gingival abrasions than the toothbrush with rounded filaments. Practical implications: Toothbrush filament design should be considered when choosing toothbrush for oral hygiene after oral surgery.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

toothbrush; conical filament; gingival health; healing; tooth; oral surgery; hygiene

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Health Problems of Civilization
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: 09
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.47-53,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Kovalova E.

• Clinic of Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty Hospital, Holleho 14, 080 01 Presov, Slovakia

autor

Novak B.

• Department of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery FM CU and OISE, Bratislava, Slovakia

autor

Klamarova T.

• Clinic of Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty Hospital, Holleho 14, 080 01 Presov, Slovakia

autor

Eliasova A.

• Clinic of Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty Hospital, Holleho 14, 080 01 Presov, Slovakia

Bibliografia

• 1. Addy M. (2008), Oral hygiene products: potential for harm to oral and systemic health? Periodontol, 48, p. 54-65.
• 2. Attin T., Hornecker E. (2005), Tooth brushing and oral health: how frequently and when should tooth brushing be performed? Oral Health Prev Dent., 3(Suppl. 3), p. 135-140.
• 3. Axelsson P., Lindhe J. (1978), Effect of controlled oral hygiene procedures on caries and periodontal-disease in adults. J Clin Periodontol , 5, p. 133-151.
• 4. Daly C.G., Highfield J.E. (1996), Effect of localized experimental gingivitis on early supragingival plaque accumulation. J Clin Periodontol, 23, p. 160-164.
• 5. Dörfer C.E., von Bethlenfalvy E.R., Kugel B., Pioch T. (2003), Cleaning efficacy of a manual toothbrush with tapered filaments. Oral Health Prev Dent, 1, p. 111-118.
• 6. Drisko C., Henderson R., Vancey J. (1995), A review of current toothbrushbristle end-rounding studies. Compend Contin Educ Dent, 16, p. 694-707.
• 7. Checchi L., Montevecchi M., Gatto R.M., Moreschi A., Checchi V. (2007), Clinical efficacy of two toothbrushes with different bristles. Int J Dent Hygiene, 5, p. 242-246.
• 8. Löe H. (1967), The Gingival Index, the Plaque Index and the Retention Index System. J Periodontol, 38, p. 610-616.
• 9. Niemi M.L., Sandholm L., Ainamo J. (1984), Frequency of gingival lesions after standardized brushing as related to stiffness of toothbrush and abrasiveness of dentifrice. J Clin Periodontol; 4: p. 254-261.
• 10. Page R.C. (1986), Gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol; 13(Suppl. 5), p. 345-359.
• 11. Saxer U.P., Yankell S.L. (1997), Impact of improved toothbrushes on dental diseases. Quintessence Int; 28: p. 513–525.
• 12. Sgan-Cohen H.D., Vered Y.A. (2005), Clinical trial of the meridol® toothbrush with conical filaments: evaluation of clinical effectiveness and subjective satisfaction. J Clin Dent; 16: p. 109-113.
• 13. Schulz K.F., Altman D.G., Moher D. (2010), CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ, 340: p. 332.
• 14. Silness J., Löe H. (1964), Periodontal disease in pregnancy. II. Correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condition. Acta Odontol Scand. 22: p. 121-135.
• 15. Versteeg P.A., Piscaer M., Rosema N.A.M., Timmerman M.F., van der Velden U., van der Weijden G.A. (2008), Tapered toothbrush filaments in relation to gingival abrasion, removal of plaque and treatment of gingivitis. Int J Dent Hyg, 6: p. 74-82.
• 16. von Bethlenfalvy E.R., Kugel B., Pioch T., Dörfer C.E. (2002), Einfluss unterschiedlicher Filamente auf die Gingivitisreduktion zweier Handzahnbürsten. Parodontologie, 13, p. 286-287.