Sustainability of regular use of interdental cleaning tools in periodontally healthy individuals

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Mert Yılmaz, Timur Köse, Nurcan Buduneli
{"title":"Sustainability of regular use of interdental cleaning tools in periodontally healthy individuals","authors":"Mert Yılmaz, Timur Köse, Nurcan Buduneli","doi":"10.1002/jper.24-0551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the sustainability of regular use of 2 different interdental cleaning tools in 24 weeks by periodontally healthy individuals as a component of primary prevention.MethodsPeriodontally healthy individuals were randomly assigned to dental floss or rubber interdental pick group. Participants received an oral care kit and a calendar to record the times they used the floss/pick. Full‐mouth scores of plaque and bleeding were recorded. They were recalled on the 8th and 24th weeks, and asked to bring back the waste of the interdental cleaning tools. Regular use was defined as using the tool ≥ 3 days/week, and sustainability is the number of weeks with regular use. Data were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests.ResultsFifty‐four participants completed the study protocol. Of these, 28 were in the rubber interdental pick, and 26 were in the dental floss group. In the rubber pick group, the mean number of weeks with regular use was 12.61 out of 24 weeks, while it was 4.96 in the dental floss group. The difference between the study groups in terms of the sustainability of regular use of the interdental cleaning tool was statistically significant (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.003). Plaque and bleeding scores were similar in the study groups at baseline and recall (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &gt; 0.05), and negatively correlated with the number of weeks with regular use (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.05).ConclusionWithin the limits of this study, the use of rubber interdental picks can be recommended for superior sustainability in periodontally healthy individuals, provided that the interdental space allows passage.Plain Language SummaryThis study compared how well rubber interdental picks and dental floss work over 6 months for people with healthy gums. It aimed to find out which tool people use more consistently. Interdental cleaning is important because brushing alone does not remove all the plaque. Regular cleaning between teeth helps to prevent gum diseases and tooth decay. Fifty‐four volunteers with healthy gums were divided into 2 groups: 1 group used rubber interdental picks, and the other used dental floss. Participants were instructed to use their assigned tool daily and follow a regular oral care routine. Their usage and oral health were monitored throughout the study. Results showed that people used rubber interdental picks more regularly than dental floss. On average, those using picks continued for about 12.6 weeks out of 24 weeks, while floss users maintained the habit for approximately 5 weeks. As a conclusion, rubber interdental picks seem to be more likely to be used consistently and can be more effective for maintaining gum health compared to dental floss.","PeriodicalId":16716,"journal":{"name":"Journal of periodontology","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jper.24-0551","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the sustainability of regular use of 2 different interdental cleaning tools in 24 weeks by periodontally healthy individuals as a component of primary prevention.MethodsPeriodontally healthy individuals were randomly assigned to dental floss or rubber interdental pick group. Participants received an oral care kit and a calendar to record the times they used the floss/pick. Full‐mouth scores of plaque and bleeding were recorded. They were recalled on the 8th and 24th weeks, and asked to bring back the waste of the interdental cleaning tools. Regular use was defined as using the tool ≥ 3 days/week, and sustainability is the number of weeks with regular use. Data were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests.ResultsFifty‐four participants completed the study protocol. Of these, 28 were in the rubber interdental pick, and 26 were in the dental floss group. In the rubber pick group, the mean number of weeks with regular use was 12.61 out of 24 weeks, while it was 4.96 in the dental floss group. The difference between the study groups in terms of the sustainability of regular use of the interdental cleaning tool was statistically significant (p = 0.003). Plaque and bleeding scores were similar in the study groups at baseline and recall (p > 0.05), and negatively correlated with the number of weeks with regular use (p < 0.05).ConclusionWithin the limits of this study, the use of rubber interdental picks can be recommended for superior sustainability in periodontally healthy individuals, provided that the interdental space allows passage.Plain Language SummaryThis study compared how well rubber interdental picks and dental floss work over 6 months for people with healthy gums. It aimed to find out which tool people use more consistently. Interdental cleaning is important because brushing alone does not remove all the plaque. Regular cleaning between teeth helps to prevent gum diseases and tooth decay. Fifty‐four volunteers with healthy gums were divided into 2 groups: 1 group used rubber interdental picks, and the other used dental floss. Participants were instructed to use their assigned tool daily and follow a regular oral care routine. Their usage and oral health were monitored throughout the study. Results showed that people used rubber interdental picks more regularly than dental floss. On average, those using picks continued for about 12.6 weeks out of 24 weeks, while floss users maintained the habit for approximately 5 weeks. As a conclusion, rubber interdental picks seem to be more likely to be used consistently and can be more effective for maintaining gum health compared to dental floss.
牙周健康个体定期使用牙间清洁工具的可持续性
本研究的目的是比较牙周健康个体在24周内定期使用两种不同的牙间清洁工具作为初级预防的组成部分的可持续性。方法将口腔健康者随机分为牙线组和橡胶牙签组。参与者收到一个口腔护理包和一个日历,记录他们使用牙线/牙签的次数。记录牙菌斑和出血的全口评分。分别于第8周和第24周召回患者,并要求回收牙间清洁工具的废弃物。定期使用定义为使用工具≥3天/周,可持续性定义为定期使用工具的周数。使用适当的统计检验对数据进行分析。54名参与者完成了研究方案。其中28只在橡胶牙签组,26只在牙线组。在24周中,橡胶剔牙组的平均使用周数为12.61周,而牙线组的平均使用周数为4.96周。在定期使用牙间清洁工具方面,研究组之间的差异具有统计学意义(p = 0.003)。各组在基线和回忆时的斑块和出血评分相似(p >;0.05),且与常规用药周数呈负相关(p <;0.05)。结论在本研究的范围内,如果牙周间隙允许通过,可以推荐使用橡胶牙间剔牙器,以提高牙周健康人群的可持续性。这项研究比较了橡胶牙签和牙线在6个月内对牙龈健康的人的效果。它旨在找出人们更一致地使用哪种工具。牙间清洁很重要,因为仅仅刷牙并不能清除所有的牙菌斑。定期清洁牙齿有助于预防牙龈疾病和蛀牙。54名牙龈健康的志愿者被分为两组:一组使用橡胶牙签,另一组使用牙线。参与者被指示每天使用他们指定的工具,并遵循定期的口腔护理程序。在整个研究过程中监测了它们的使用和口腔健康。结果显示,人们使用橡胶牙签比使用牙线更频繁。平均而言,使用牙签的人在24周内持续了12.6周,而使用牙线的人保持了大约5周的习惯。综上所述,与牙线相比,橡胶牙签似乎更有可能持续使用,并且对保持牙龈健康更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of periodontology
Journal of periodontology 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
7.00%
发文量
290
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Periodontology publishes articles relevant to the science and practice of periodontics and related areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信