两种电动牙刷的比较:对正畸患者的评价。

IF 1.1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Minerva dental and oral science Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04711-8
Jacopo Lanzetti, Paolo D Michienzi, Jody Collura, Silvia Sabatini, Sara Vilardi, Andrea Deregibus
{"title":"两种电动牙刷的比较:对正畸患者的评价。","authors":"Jacopo Lanzetti,&nbsp;Paolo D Michienzi,&nbsp;Jody Collura,&nbsp;Silvia Sabatini,&nbsp;Sara Vilardi,&nbsp;Andrea Deregibus","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04711-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The effectiveness of different types of electric toothbrushes in terms of removing bacterial plaque is still a debated issue. The aim of the study was to compare the plaque removal after a single use of two types of electric toothbrushes, sonic and roto-oscillating, in patients with fixed orthodontics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-five subjects with fixed multibrackets appliances were randomly selected. Plaque scores were detected using a fluorescein-based detector. After using the sonic toothbrush with a surfactant-free toothpaste, the plaque scores were detected again. After 3 months, the procedure is performed again following the same methods, using the roto-oscillating toothbrush. For the statistical analysis a Student's t-test using Microsoft Excel 2021 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA) was performed. The differences were considered statistically significant for probability values P<0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>It can be seen that the brushing carried out with a sonic technology is more effective than the roto-oscillating technology. However, the FMPS, MOPI and OPI indexes do not show differences between the use of the two toothbrushes. The OHI-S index shows a statistically significant difference using the sonic toothbrush with a significance level of 0.05%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>It can be said that both electric toothbrushes are effective for maintaining a good home oral hygiene in patients with fixed orthodontics.</p>","PeriodicalId":18709,"journal":{"name":"Minerva dental and oral science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of two electric toothbrushes: evaluation on orthodontic patients.\",\"authors\":\"Jacopo Lanzetti,&nbsp;Paolo D Michienzi,&nbsp;Jody Collura,&nbsp;Silvia Sabatini,&nbsp;Sara Vilardi,&nbsp;Andrea Deregibus\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04711-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The effectiveness of different types of electric toothbrushes in terms of removing bacterial plaque is still a debated issue. The aim of the study was to compare the plaque removal after a single use of two types of electric toothbrushes, sonic and roto-oscillating, in patients with fixed orthodontics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-five subjects with fixed multibrackets appliances were randomly selected. Plaque scores were detected using a fluorescein-based detector. After using the sonic toothbrush with a surfactant-free toothpaste, the plaque scores were detected again. After 3 months, the procedure is performed again following the same methods, using the roto-oscillating toothbrush. For the statistical analysis a Student's t-test using Microsoft Excel 2021 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA) was performed. The differences were considered statistically significant for probability values P<0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>It can be seen that the brushing carried out with a sonic technology is more effective than the roto-oscillating technology. However, the FMPS, MOPI and OPI indexes do not show differences between the use of the two toothbrushes. The OHI-S index shows a statistically significant difference using the sonic toothbrush with a significance level of 0.05%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>It can be said that both electric toothbrushes are effective for maintaining a good home oral hygiene in patients with fixed orthodontics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18709,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva dental and oral science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva dental and oral science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04711-8\",\"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":"Minerva dental and oral science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04711-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:不同类型的电动牙刷在去除细菌菌斑方面的有效性仍然是一个有争议的问题。本研究的目的是比较固定正畸患者使用两种类型的电动牙刷(声波牙刷和旋转摆动牙刷)一次清除牙菌斑的效果。方法:随机选取25例使用固定式多托矫治器的受试者。使用基于荧光素的检测器检测斑块评分。在使用无表面活性剂牙膏的声波牙刷后,再次检测牙菌斑得分。3个月后,再次按照相同的方法进行手术,使用旋转摆动牙刷。统计分析使用Microsoft Excel 2021 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA)进行学生t检验。结果:可以看出,用声波技术进行的刷牙比旋转振荡技术更有效。然而,FMPS, MOPI和OPI指数并没有显示两种牙刷使用之间的差异。使用声波牙刷的ohi指数差异有统计学意义,显著性水平为0.05%。结论:两种电动牙刷对固定正畸患者保持良好的家庭口腔卫生均有较好的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of two electric toothbrushes: evaluation on orthodontic patients.

Background: The effectiveness of different types of electric toothbrushes in terms of removing bacterial plaque is still a debated issue. The aim of the study was to compare the plaque removal after a single use of two types of electric toothbrushes, sonic and roto-oscillating, in patients with fixed orthodontics.

Methods: Twenty-five subjects with fixed multibrackets appliances were randomly selected. Plaque scores were detected using a fluorescein-based detector. After using the sonic toothbrush with a surfactant-free toothpaste, the plaque scores were detected again. After 3 months, the procedure is performed again following the same methods, using the roto-oscillating toothbrush. For the statistical analysis a Student's t-test using Microsoft Excel 2021 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA) was performed. The differences were considered statistically significant for probability values P<0.05.

Results: It can be seen that the brushing carried out with a sonic technology is more effective than the roto-oscillating technology. However, the FMPS, MOPI and OPI indexes do not show differences between the use of the two toothbrushes. The OHI-S index shows a statistically significant difference using the sonic toothbrush with a significance level of 0.05%.

Conclusions: It can be said that both electric toothbrushes are effective for maintaining a good home oral hygiene in patients with fixed orthodontics.

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
Minerva dental and oral science
Minerva dental and oral science DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
61
期刊最新文献
In-silico immunoinformatic vaccine design for Treponema denticola ergothionase. Virtual reality in specialized dentistry: employing virtual reality for the alleviation of pain and anxiety in hereditary angioedema patients. Medico-legal considerations in immediate loading implantology: risks, responsibilities, and best practices. Restorative and endodontic clinical strategies during COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic: a revision of the literature. A simple method to identify implant sites in totally edentulous arches: a pilot study with thermo-printed templates used with cone beam computed tomography.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1