DuurzaamheidContactOver onsVacatures
  • Tips en Adviezen
  • TePe Share
  • Duurzaamheid
  • Contact
  • Over ons
  • Vacatures
/ Voor de professie / Wetenschappelijke artikelen / Interproximal oral hygiene

Bedrukkingen

Clinical Update en Nieuwsbrief

Simply Science - Dental Caries

Simply Science - Oral hygiene behaviour

Simply Science - Droge mond

Demonstratieproducten

Display materiaal

Product catalogus

TePe Productadviestool

Wetenschappelijke artikelen

Comparison of interdental brush to dental floss

Mechanical plaque control

Interproximal oral hygiene

Prevention of periodontitis

Quality of cleaning

The effectiveness of interdental brushes

TePe Benelux B.V.

Amethistweg 5, 2665 NT Bleiswijk

Nederland

Tel:+31 (0)85- 760 39 66

info.be@tepe.com

www.tepe.com

All rights reserved.

Over TePe

  • Over ons
  • Tips en Adviezen
  • Mediabank
  • Verkooppunten
  • Veelgestelde vragen

Voor de professie

  • Bedrukkingen
  • Display materiaal
  • Clinical Update en Nieuwsbrief
  • Product catalogus
  • Wetenschappelijke artikelen
  • TePe ervaringspakket aanvragen

TePe International

  • Vind uw regio
  • Duurzaamheid
  • TePe Share
  • TePe Terms of use
  • Patent en design

A network meta-analysis of interproximal oral hygiene methods in the reduction of clinical indices of inflammation

Kotsakis GA et al.
J Periodontol. 2018 Feb 19. doi: 10.1002/JPER.17-0368.

 

This study aims to compare the effect, measured as gingival inflammation, bleeding-on-probing, plaque, and pocket depth, between different interdental cleaning regimes. The regimes included are flossing, powered flossing, toothpicks, toothpicks and intensive oral hygiene instructions, water jet irrigation devices, interdental brushes, gum massaging devices, toothbrush only (controls), powered toothbrush (controls), powered toothbrush and waterjet.

 

Network meta-analysis is the method chosen to make both direct and indirect comparisons possible among included studies and to provide information which enables ranking of the included interventions based on the set outcomes. The results are based on the 22 studies that met the criteria to be included in the analysis.

 

Interdental brushes displayed the best result regarding gingival inflammation, plaque reduction, and pocket reduction. Concerning bleeding on probing, toothpicks in combination with intensive oral hygiene instruction presented the best outcome. Only one study used the intervention toothpicks in combination with intensive oral hygiene instruction, and in this case, it was not possible to determine whether the actual device or the instruction part was crucial for the result. However, the authors conclude that from an individual perspective the choice of devices needs to be based on individual and clinical conditions.