PubMed · 14718989
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
E E Thompson. 2003-12-06. Overbrushing challenge.. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4810801
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
AIM: To review the literature on the effects of stannous fluoride on gingivitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Medline and cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched up to August 2005 to identify appropriate studies. The primary outcome measure was gingivitis. RESULTS: Independent screening of titles and abstracts of 542 papers resulted in 36 publications (inter-reviewer ê score of 0.76), out of which 15 papers finally fulfilled the criteria of eligibility. For SnF(2)dentifrices, a statistically significant reduction in gingivitis was noted in comparison with control (weighted mean difference (WMD) of 0.15 (gingival index) and 0.21 (gingivitis severity index) (test for heterogeneity p<0.00001, I(2)=91.1% and p=0.03, I(2)=80.1%, respectively)). With regard to plaque reduction inconsistent results existed. On using the plaque index no differences were found, whereas meta-analysis of the Turesky index provided a WMD of 0.31 (p=0.01, test for heterogeneity p<0.0001, I(2)=91.7%). Because of insufficient data, a meta-analysis for SnF(2)mouth rinse and dentifrice/mouthrinse formulations was not performed. CONCLUSIONS: The use of SnF(2) dentifrices results in gingivitis and plaque reduction when compared with a conventional dentifrice. The precise magnitude of this effect was difficult to assess because of a high level of heterogeneity in study outcomes.
The ultimate goal of periodontal disease prevention is to maintain the dentition over a lifetime in a state of health, comfort, and function in an aesthetically pleasing presentation. This article focuses on primary and secondary periodontal disease prevention as they relate to gingivitis and periodontitis. Risk assessment, mechanical plaque control, chemical plaque control, current clinical recommendations for optimal prevention, and future preventive strategies are discussed.
AIM: This study was designed to test whether the approximal efficacy of a powered toothbrush (Braun Oral-B 3D Plaque Remover) can be improved when a pointed-shaped brush head (PBH) specifically designed for these approximal areas is used as compared with the standard cup-shaped brush head (CBH). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty non-dental students were included. They all received the powered toothbrush and two different brush heads (CBH+PBH). Instructions were given to use each brush head twice every day (2 min. with the CBH followed by 1 min. with the PBH). Two weeks later they received an appointment for the first experiment (Exp 1), prior to which they abstained from all oral hygiene procedures for 48 h. Plaque was assessed at 6 sites/tooth. Next, the dental hygienist brushed for 2 min. (30 s/quadrant) with the CBH. Plaque was scored again. Subsequently, the dental hygienist brushed the approximal areas for another minute: in two randomly selected contra-lateral quadrants for 30 s with the CBH and in the opposing quadrants for 30 s with the PBH. The next approximal plaque was scored a third time. After 2-3 weeks, Exp 2 was carried out comparable to Exp 1; only this time the panelists brushed themselves. RESULTS: Exp 1 showed approximal plaque scores at the baseline of 1.70 and 1.72 and at post-brushing 0.21 and 0.26 for the CBH + PBH and CBH only, respectively (p<0.05). The additional increase in approximal plaque reduction after 30 s of brushing with PBH was 22% and for the CBH 19% (p<0.05). Exp 2 showed approximal plaque scores at baseline of 1.76 and 1.74 and post-brushing of 0.21 and 0.24 for the CBH+PBH and the CBH, respectively. The additional approximal plaque reduction of 30 s brushing with PBH was 19% and 18% with the CBH (no significant difference). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: An additional 1 min. showed minor differences (1-3%) between brush heads. The effect of the 1 min. extra brushing (+/-18%) itself was much larger. It seems therefore beneficial to advise the patient to brush longer. A second different brush head may stimulate to do so.