Ronald Chan, Jiaguan Zhang, Colman McGrath, Paul Tsang, Otto Lam
{"title":"超声义齿卫生干预方案在社区居住老年人中的有效性的随机试验。","authors":"Ronald Chan, Jiaguan Zhang, Colman McGrath, Paul Tsang, Otto Lam","doi":"10.26650/eor.20231025114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of ultrasonic denture hygiene interventions in improving denture cleanliness among elderly individuals.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Sixty-six participants who had received upper metal framework removable partial dentures within the past 5 years were randomly allocated into three denture hygiene intervention groups: group 1 (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush and ultrasonic cleaning with cetylpyridinium chloride), group 2 (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush and ultrasonic cleaning with distilled water), and control (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush only). Denture cleanliness was assessed at baseline and 1-month using: i) Denture Cleanliness Index (DCI) scores; ii) plaque coverage percentage; and (iii) microbiological samples for bacterial and yeast detection. Differences between groups were assessed with one-way analysis of variance and Chi-squared tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean DCI scores and mean percentages of plaque coverage area were significantly reduced in group 1 and group 2, compared to the control group for both cobalt chromium (CoCr) and acrylic fitting surfaces (p<0.001). No significant differences were found between groups 1 and 2 with regard to the prevalence and viable counts of yeasts or total microbial viable counts. No significant differences in the investigated clinical and microbiological parameters were observed between CoCr and acrylic surfaces following the intervention period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The ultrasonic cleaner was significantly more effective than mechanical cleaning in the reduction of biofilm coverage on metal framework removable partial dentures over a 1-month intervention period. Nevertheless, the adjunctive use of cetylpyridinium chloride with ultrasonic cleaning did not yield additional benefits.</p>","PeriodicalId":41993,"journal":{"name":"European Oral Research","volume":"57 2","pages":"83-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/dd/8d/eor-057-083.PMC10387143.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A randomized trial of the effectiveness of an ultrasonic denture hygiene intervention program among community dwelling elders.\",\"authors\":\"Ronald Chan, Jiaguan Zhang, Colman McGrath, Paul Tsang, Otto Lam\",\"doi\":\"10.26650/eor.20231025114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of ultrasonic denture hygiene interventions in improving denture cleanliness among elderly individuals.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Sixty-six participants who had received upper metal framework removable partial dentures within the past 5 years were randomly allocated into three denture hygiene intervention groups: group 1 (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush and ultrasonic cleaning with cetylpyridinium chloride), group 2 (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush and ultrasonic cleaning with distilled water), and control (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush only). Denture cleanliness was assessed at baseline and 1-month using: i) Denture Cleanliness Index (DCI) scores; ii) plaque coverage percentage; and (iii) microbiological samples for bacterial and yeast detection. Differences between groups were assessed with one-way analysis of variance and Chi-squared tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean DCI scores and mean percentages of plaque coverage area were significantly reduced in group 1 and group 2, compared to the control group for both cobalt chromium (CoCr) and acrylic fitting surfaces (p<0.001). No significant differences were found between groups 1 and 2 with regard to the prevalence and viable counts of yeasts or total microbial viable counts. No significant differences in the investigated clinical and microbiological parameters were observed between CoCr and acrylic surfaces following the intervention period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The ultrasonic cleaner was significantly more effective than mechanical cleaning in the reduction of biofilm coverage on metal framework removable partial dentures over a 1-month intervention period. Nevertheless, the adjunctive use of cetylpyridinium chloride with ultrasonic cleaning did not yield additional benefits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":41993,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Oral Research\",\"volume\":\"57 2\",\"pages\":\"83-89\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/dd/8d/eor-057-083.PMC10387143.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Oral Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26650/eor.20231025114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Oral Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26650/eor.20231025114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
A randomized trial of the effectiveness of an ultrasonic denture hygiene intervention program among community dwelling elders.
Purpose: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of ultrasonic denture hygiene interventions in improving denture cleanliness among elderly individuals.
Materials and methods: Sixty-six participants who had received upper metal framework removable partial dentures within the past 5 years were randomly allocated into three denture hygiene intervention groups: group 1 (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush and ultrasonic cleaning with cetylpyridinium chloride), group 2 (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush and ultrasonic cleaning with distilled water), and control (mechanical cleaning with a toothbrush only). Denture cleanliness was assessed at baseline and 1-month using: i) Denture Cleanliness Index (DCI) scores; ii) plaque coverage percentage; and (iii) microbiological samples for bacterial and yeast detection. Differences between groups were assessed with one-way analysis of variance and Chi-squared tests.
Results: Mean DCI scores and mean percentages of plaque coverage area were significantly reduced in group 1 and group 2, compared to the control group for both cobalt chromium (CoCr) and acrylic fitting surfaces (p<0.001). No significant differences were found between groups 1 and 2 with regard to the prevalence and viable counts of yeasts or total microbial viable counts. No significant differences in the investigated clinical and microbiological parameters were observed between CoCr and acrylic surfaces following the intervention period.
Conclusion: The ultrasonic cleaner was significantly more effective than mechanical cleaning in the reduction of biofilm coverage on metal framework removable partial dentures over a 1-month intervention period. Nevertheless, the adjunctive use of cetylpyridinium chloride with ultrasonic cleaning did not yield additional benefits.