 |
|
Oral Irrigation Studies
A two-month study of
the effects of oral irrigation and automatic toothbrush use in an adult
orthodontic population with fixed appliances (braces).
Burch JG,
Lanese R,
Ngan P.
Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Ohio State University,
Columbus.
Forty-seven adult orthodontic (with braces) patients with fixed orthodontic appliances
were divided into three study groups: (1) oral irrigation with automatic
toothbrush, (n = 16); (2) oral irrigation with manual tooth brushing, (n =
16); (3) control group with continued normal tooth brushing only, (n = 15).
Gingival (gums) and plaque indices, bleeding after probing, and gingival sulcus
(pocket)
depths were assessed at baseline, 1-month, and 2-month periods. Marked and
significant gingival and plaque improvements from baseline were measured in
all three study groups. After 1 to 2 months use of the automatic toothbrush
and/or the oral irrigation device, there was a significant reduction in
plaque when compared with the control group who used only the manual
toothbrush (p = 0.026). Also, there was a significant reduction in gingival
inflammation (infection) (p = 0.045) and evidence for reducing bleeding after probing (p
= 0.037). No significant differences were found in probe depths among the
three study groups, however, use of both devices reduced the pocket depth
significantly from baseline by 0.5 mm (p < 0.0002). For this population
of orthodontic patients, significant reductions in plaque, gingival
inflammation, and a tendency for reduced bleeding after probing occurred in
both groups with the power device. These improvements were most attributable
to the effect of the oral irrigation device.
Publication Types:
PMID: 8059746 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Comparison of irrigation to floss as an adjunct
(in addition) to tooth
brushing: effect on bleeding, gingivitis, and supragingival plaque.
Barnes CM,
Russell CM,
Reinhardt RA,
Payne JB,
Lyle DM.
UNMC College of Dentistry, Lincoln, NE, USA. cbarnes@unmc.edu
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this twenty-eight day, randomized, single-blind
clinical trial was to assess the efficacy of the addition of daily oral
irrigation to both power and manual tooth brushing, compared to a traditional
regimen of manual tooth brushing and flossing, to determine which regimen had
the greatest effect on the reduction of gingival bleeding, gingivitis, and
supragingival plaque. METHODOLOGY: The study was designed for a total of 105
subjects to participate in a twenty-eight day trial, with 35 subjects randomly
assigned to one of three groups: Group 1-manual toothbrush and floss; Group
2-manual toothbrush and dental water jet; and Group 3-sonic toothbrush and
dental water jet. All subjects received written and verbal instructions for
using their regimens. Subjects were asked to brush for a timed two minutes,
twice per day, with the brush and the dentifrice provided, and to refrain from
using any additional oral hygiene aids. Subjects using the dental water jet were
instructed to use the water jet on a medium setting, irrigating once per day
with 500 ml of luke warm water. Subjects using the dental floss were instructed
to use the floss once daily. Subjects were examined by two calibrated examiners,
and data were collected at baseline (BSL), 14 days (D14), and 28 days (D28).
Subjects were asked to abstain from any oral hygiene for 12 hours prior to each
study visit. Subjects were scored using the Carter and Barnes Bleeding Index,
Loe and Silness Gingival Index, and the Proximal/Marginal Plaque Index. Mean
scores on the three indices for the three groups were used for statistical
analysis at each time point. Additionally, the means were used for comparisons
as change from baseline and percent change from baseline at D14 and D28. The
significance of percentage change in each index from baseline to D14 and D28 was
evaluated using a one-tailed t-test. Significant differences are reported at
alpha < or = 0.05 for these planned group comparisons. RESULTS: Thirty-one
subjects in Group 1, 32 subjects in Group 2, and 32 subjects in Group 3
completed the study. Bleeding Index: Groups 2 and 3, the irrigation groups, were
statistically significantly more effective than Group 1 in reducing the bleeding
index at D14 and D28, whether measured by mean reduction or percentage
reduction. Gingival Index: At D14, both irrigation groups demonstrated a
statistically significantly greater reduction in the gingival index compared to
brushing and flossing for the facial surfaces. There was no significant
difference between groups for the lingual surface at D14. At D28 there was a
significant difference between Groups 1 and 2 for both the facial and lingual
surfaces. Plaque Index: There was one significant difference between groups for
the plaque index measured on the lingual surfaces. The manual toothbrush and
floss were less effective than the sonic toothbrush and irrigation. Group 3 was
also significantly better than Group 1 in reducing the plaque index on the
facial surfaces at both D14 and D28. On plaque percentage reduction on the
facial surface, Group 2 was significantly better than Group 1 at D14. There was
no statistical difference between Group 1 and Group 2 at D28. CONCLUSION: The
results of this clinical trial indicate that when combined with manual or sonic
tooth brushing, oral irrigation is an effective alternative to manual tooth
brushing and dental floss for reducing bleeding, gingival inflammation, and
plaque removal.
Publication Types:
PMID: 16305005 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
|
