Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
, 2015, 828794

Evaluation of Clinical Effectiveness and Subjective Satisfaction of a New Toothbrush for Postsurgical Hygiene Care: A Randomized Split-Mouth Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluation of Clinical Effectiveness and Subjective Satisfaction of a New Toothbrush for Postsurgical Hygiene Care: A Randomized Split-Mouth Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Marco Montevecchi et al. ScientificWorldJournal.

Abstract

The aim of this RCT was to evaluate plaque control and gingival health promotion effectiveness of a new toothbrush with extra-soft filaments in postsurgical sets. Ten consecutive patients with at least two scheduled symmetrical periodontal surgeries were selected. Following the first periodontal surgery, a test (TB1) or control (TB2) toothbrush was randomly assigned. After the second surgery, the remaining toothbrush was given. Patients were asked to gently wipe the surgical area from days 3 to 7 postoperatively and to gently brush using a roll technique from day 7 till the end of the study. Baseline evaluation took place on the day of surgery and follow-ups were performed at days 7, 14, and 30 postoperatively. A more evident PI reduction was recorded for test toothbrush where a regular decrease was observed till day 14; then, this parameter tended to stabilize, remaining however lower than that recorded for the control toothbrush. There were no statistical differences in the GI between test and control toothbrushes. All patients introduced the test toothbrush at surgical site at third day; the control toothbrush was introduced within a mean of 9 days. The introduction of the test toothbrush 3 days after periodontal surgery may be recommended.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The head of the test toothbrush (TB1) and an extra-fine conical bristle.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The head of the control toothbrush (TB2) and a soft-end cylindrical bristle.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Plaque Index at each time point of the study for test (TB1) and control (TB2) toothbrushes.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Discomfort at brushing (VAS scales: 0 = minimum, 10 = maximum) during the study period for test (TB1) and control (TB2) toothbrushes.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Löe H. Ural hygiene in the prevention of caries and periodontal disease. International Dental Journal. 2000;50(3):129–139. doi: 10.1111/j.1875-595X.2000.tb00553.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Flores-de-Jacoby L., Mengel R. Conventional surgical procedures. Periodontology 2000. 1995;9:38–54. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1995.tb00055.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blomlöf L., Lindskog S., Hammarström L. A time-related study of healing in the marginal periodontal/root interface. Swedish dental journal. 1988;12(3):101–112. - PubMed
    1. Sanz M., Herrera D. Role of oral hygiene during the healing phase of periodontal therapy. In: Lang N. P., Attström R., Löe H., editors. Proceedings of the European Workshop on Mechanical Plaque Control—Status of the Art and Science of Dental Plaque Control, December 1998. Berlin, Germany: Quintessence; 1998. pp. 248–267.
    1. Daly C. G. Effect of localized experimental gingivitis on early supragingival plaque accumulation. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. 1996;23(3):160–164. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.1996.tb02071.x. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Feedback