Waterpik®用于正畸固定矫治器患者口腔卫生维护的有效性:一项随机对照试验。

IF 1.4 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Journal of Orthodontics Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-19 DOI:10.1177/14653125231173708
Daniel Tyler, Jing Kang, Hock Hoe Goh
{"title":"Waterpik®用于正畸固定矫治器患者口腔卫生维护的有效性:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Daniel Tyler, Jing Kang, Hock Hoe Goh","doi":"10.1177/14653125231173708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To establish whether the use of a WaterPik<sup>®</sup> alongside a manual toothbrush (WaterPik<sup>®</sup> + MTB) is more effective for maintaining oral hygiene compared to the use of a manual toothbrush alone (MTB) in patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A single-centre, two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Orthodontic department at York Hospital, York Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 40 fit and well participants, aged 10-20 years, being treated with upper and lower fixed orthodontic appliances.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were randomly allocated, using stratified block randomisation, to the control group (MTB) or intervention group '(Waterpik<sup>®</sup> + MTB)'. Plaque, gingival and interdental bleeding indices were recorded at baseline, 8 weeks, 32 weeks and 56 weeks. A generalised linear mixed model was used to assess differences between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An interim analysis of results was performed with 40 patients recruited and 85% of data collected. The overall mean differences between the groups were as follows: plaque index = 0.199 (<i>P</i> = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.24 to 0.27); gingival index = -0.008 (<i>P</i> = 0.94, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.20); and interdental bleeding index = 5.60 (<i>P</i> = 0.563, 95% CI -13.22 to 24.42). No statistical difference between the two groups was found for any variable. The trial was stopped at this point.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In terms of oral hygiene, our study did not find evidence to support the claim of benefit of using a Waterpik<sup>®</sup> in addition to a manual toothbrush for patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances.</p>","PeriodicalId":16677,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthodontics","volume":" ","pages":"367-377"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10693741/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Waterpik<sup>®</sup> for oral hygiene maintenance in orthodontic fixed appliance patients: A randomised controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Tyler, Jing Kang, Hock Hoe Goh\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14653125231173708\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To establish whether the use of a WaterPik<sup>®</sup> alongside a manual toothbrush (WaterPik<sup>®</sup> + MTB) is more effective for maintaining oral hygiene compared to the use of a manual toothbrush alone (MTB) in patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A single-centre, two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Orthodontic department at York Hospital, York Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 40 fit and well participants, aged 10-20 years, being treated with upper and lower fixed orthodontic appliances.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were randomly allocated, using stratified block randomisation, to the control group (MTB) or intervention group '(Waterpik<sup>®</sup> + MTB)'. Plaque, gingival and interdental bleeding indices were recorded at baseline, 8 weeks, 32 weeks and 56 weeks. A generalised linear mixed model was used to assess differences between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An interim analysis of results was performed with 40 patients recruited and 85% of data collected. The overall mean differences between the groups were as follows: plaque index = 0.199 (<i>P</i> = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.24 to 0.27); gingival index = -0.008 (<i>P</i> = 0.94, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.20); and interdental bleeding index = 5.60 (<i>P</i> = 0.563, 95% CI -13.22 to 24.42). No statistical difference between the two groups was found for any variable. The trial was stopped at this point.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In terms of oral hygiene, our study did not find evidence to support the claim of benefit of using a Waterpik<sup>®</sup> in addition to a manual toothbrush for patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16677,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthodontics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"367-377\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10693741/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14653125231173708\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14653125231173708","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨在佩戴固定正畸矫治器的患者中,WaterPik®与手动牙刷(WaterPik®+ MTB)一起使用是否比单独使用手动牙刷(MTB)更有效地保持口腔卫生。设计:单中心、双臂、平行组、单盲、随机对照临床试验,分配比例为1:1。地点:英国约克教学医院NHS基金会信托约克医院正畸科。参与者:共40名健康的参与者,年龄10-20岁,使用上、下固定正畸矫治器治疗。方法:采用分层块随机法将参与者随机分配到对照组(MTB)或干预组(Waterpik®+ MTB)。分别在基线、8周、32周和56周记录牙菌斑、牙龈和牙间出血指数。采用广义线性混合模型评估组间差异。结果:对40名患者进行了中期分析,收集了85%的数据。组间总体平均差异如下:斑块指数= 0.199 (P = 0.88, 95%可信区间[CI] -0.24 ~ 0.27);牙龈指数= -0.008 (P = 0.94, 95% CI -0.22 ~ 0.20);牙间出血指数= 5.60 (P = 0.563, 95% CI -13.22 ~ 24.42)。两组之间没有发现任何变量的统计学差异。审判就此停止了。结论:在口腔卫生方面,我们的研究没有发现证据支持佩戴固定正畸器具的患者在使用手动牙刷的同时使用Waterpik®的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of Waterpik® for oral hygiene maintenance in orthodontic fixed appliance patients: A randomised controlled trial.

Objective: To establish whether the use of a WaterPik® alongside a manual toothbrush (WaterPik® + MTB) is more effective for maintaining oral hygiene compared to the use of a manual toothbrush alone (MTB) in patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances.

Design: A single-centre, two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio.

Setting: Orthodontic department at York Hospital, York Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK.

Participants: A total of 40 fit and well participants, aged 10-20 years, being treated with upper and lower fixed orthodontic appliances.

Methods: Participants were randomly allocated, using stratified block randomisation, to the control group (MTB) or intervention group '(Waterpik® + MTB)'. Plaque, gingival and interdental bleeding indices were recorded at baseline, 8 weeks, 32 weeks and 56 weeks. A generalised linear mixed model was used to assess differences between groups.

Results: An interim analysis of results was performed with 40 patients recruited and 85% of data collected. The overall mean differences between the groups were as follows: plaque index = 0.199 (P = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.24 to 0.27); gingival index = -0.008 (P = 0.94, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.20); and interdental bleeding index = 5.60 (P = 0.563, 95% CI -13.22 to 24.42). No statistical difference between the two groups was found for any variable. The trial was stopped at this point.

Conclusions: In terms of oral hygiene, our study did not find evidence to support the claim of benefit of using a Waterpik® in addition to a manual toothbrush for patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Orthodontics
Journal of Orthodontics DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
15.40%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthodontics has an international circulation, publishing papers from throughout the world. The official journal of the British Orthodontic Society, it aims to publish high quality, evidence-based, clinically orientated or clinically relevant original research papers that will underpin evidence based orthodontic care. It particularly welcomes reports on prospective research into different treatment methods and techniques but also systematic reviews, meta-analyses and studies which will stimulate interest in new developments. Regular features include original papers on clinically relevant topics, clinical case reports, reviews of the orthodontic literature, editorials, book reviews, correspondence and other features of interest to the orthodontic community. The Journal is published in full colour throughout.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信