Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Aim To determine the efficacy of a water flosser (WF) compared to an interdental brush (IDB) in reducing gingival inflammation. Additionally, the products were compared on the incidence of gingival abrasion. Methods Young adults with moderate gingivitis and ≥4 accessible interdental spaces by IDB in each quadrant were selected for this study. Participants were randomly assigned a WF or an IDB as an adjunct to manual toothbrushing. Clinical signs of inflammation were measured in two randomly assigned contralateral quadrants by bleeding on pocket probing (BOPP) or bleeding on marginal probing (BOMP). Gingival Abrasion Score (GAS) was assessed per quadrant. Data was recorded at the baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks. Results Both groups WF ( n = 40) and IDB ( n = 38) showed a significant reduction ( p = 0.000) in BOMP and BOPP from the baseline to 4 weeks for all sites and the interdental sites only. At 4 weeks the WF group compared to the IDB group showed significantly lower BOPP ( p = 0.030) and BOMP scores ( p = 0.003) for all sites. For the interdental sites WF showed compared to IDB for BOMP significant ( p = 0.019) lower values but not for BOPP ( p = 0.219). There were no differences between the groups for GAS at any time point. Conclusion In patients with moderate gingivitis, after 4 weeks use the WF is more effective than the IDB in obtaining marginal gingival health.
Lyle et al. (Fri,) studied this question.