TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessment of the Plaque Removal Ability of Two Different Dental Floss Devices
T2 - A Comparative Study
AU - Behera, Ranjan Rashmi
AU - Jalaluddin, Mohammad
AU - Kalgeri, Sowmya Halasabalu
AU - Mailankote, Shilpa
AU - Penumatsa, Narendra Varma
AU - Patel, Dharati
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s). 2023 Open Access.
PY - 2023/10
Y1 - 2023/10
N2 - Aim: The purpose of the present study was to compare the plaque removal ability of two different dental floss devices. Materials and methods: A total of 30 participants were included in the current in vivo split-mouth investigation. The chosen group of individuals ranged in age from 18 to 40 years. All of the participants were told to brush using a modified bass method. All participants (split-mouth) were divided into two groups as follows: group I—conventional dental floss and group II—water flossers. Each side’s plaque index was calculated, and the results were contrasted with the baseline score. The type of floss used on either side of the mouth was blinded by the examiner who recorded the plaque index before and after the trial. A canine and a premolar, respectively, were chosen for analysis. The Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) consists of nine sections that must be scored. Then, sections were joined to produce data for the proximal and marginal regions. Results: In the conventional dental floss group, on the canine region, before the intervention, the plaque score was 1.30 ± 0.01 and after the intervention was 0.42 ± 0.10. On premolar region, before intervention the plaque score was 1.22 ± 0.03 and after intervention was 0.36 ± 0.03. In the water flosser group, on the canine region, before intervention the plaque score was 1.28 ± 0.04 and after intervention was 0.26 ± 0.13. On the premolar region, before intervention the plaque score was 1.32 ± 0.01 and after intervention was 0.24 ± 0.10. Conclusion: The current study concluded that a water flosser was just as effective as conventional dental floss at removing interdental plaque after a single use. Clinical significance: It is generally recognized that dental plaque plays a role in the development of many dental disorders. In order to remove plaque and avoid gingivitis and periodontitis in addition to regular brushing, regular cleaning is required, especially in the interdental spaces. The technique of choice for these areas is ordinarily flossing.
AB - Aim: The purpose of the present study was to compare the plaque removal ability of two different dental floss devices. Materials and methods: A total of 30 participants were included in the current in vivo split-mouth investigation. The chosen group of individuals ranged in age from 18 to 40 years. All of the participants were told to brush using a modified bass method. All participants (split-mouth) were divided into two groups as follows: group I—conventional dental floss and group II—water flossers. Each side’s plaque index was calculated, and the results were contrasted with the baseline score. The type of floss used on either side of the mouth was blinded by the examiner who recorded the plaque index before and after the trial. A canine and a premolar, respectively, were chosen for analysis. The Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) consists of nine sections that must be scored. Then, sections were joined to produce data for the proximal and marginal regions. Results: In the conventional dental floss group, on the canine region, before the intervention, the plaque score was 1.30 ± 0.01 and after the intervention was 0.42 ± 0.10. On premolar region, before intervention the plaque score was 1.22 ± 0.03 and after intervention was 0.36 ± 0.03. In the water flosser group, on the canine region, before intervention the plaque score was 1.28 ± 0.04 and after intervention was 0.26 ± 0.13. On the premolar region, before intervention the plaque score was 1.32 ± 0.01 and after intervention was 0.24 ± 0.10. Conclusion: The current study concluded that a water flosser was just as effective as conventional dental floss at removing interdental plaque after a single use. Clinical significance: It is generally recognized that dental plaque plays a role in the development of many dental disorders. In order to remove plaque and avoid gingivitis and periodontitis in addition to regular brushing, regular cleaning is required, especially in the interdental spaces. The technique of choice for these areas is ordinarily flossing.
KW - Dental floss
KW - Plaque
KW - Proximal surfaces
KW - Water flosser
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85176402198
U2 - 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2313
DO - 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2313
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85176402198
SN - 0976-6006
VL - 14
SP - 860
EP - 863
JO - World Journal of Dentistry
JF - World Journal of Dentistry
IS - 10
ER -