Cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with microburst technology in adolescent orthodontic patients. A randomized-controlled crossover study.

OBJECTIVES: Simplifying interdental space cleaning is a constantly discussed topic. The present study aimed to compare the cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with that of dental flossing in adolescent patients with fixed braces after four weeks of home-use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design is a randomized, single-blinded cross-over study. Following a twenty-eight-day period of product utilization in a home setting, a comparative analysis was conducted on hygiene indices, the Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) and the Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), between the test group (oral irrigator) and the control group (dental floss). RESULTS: Seventeen adolescent individuals completed the study. After 28 days of cleaning with the oral irrigator, RMNPI was 58.81% (55.31-66.47) compared to 59.46% (52.68-68.67) with dental floss (p = 0.070). Subgroup analyses did not indicate the superiority of either method. GBI after the test phase with the oral irrigator was 28.93% (23.21-33.97) and insignificantly higher compared to 26.40% (21.01-31.41) achieved with dental floss (p = 0.1585). CONCLUSIONS: Neither of the two products demonstrated statistically significant superiority in terms of cleaning efficacy. Therefore, no recommendation can be made in favor of one over the other. It was found that the high initial hygiene indices for fixed orthodontic appliances could be improved through increased awareness and precise instruction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For adolescent patients who struggle to use interdental brushes an oral irrigator may be suggested as a simple alternative in hard-to-reach areas, such as those around a fixed dental appliance.

Cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with microburst technology in orthodontic patients-a randomized-controlled crossover study.

OBJECTIVES: Orthodontic patients struggle with interdental cleaning calling for simpler mechanical devices to reduce the high plaque levels. The present study aimed to compare the cleansing efficacy of an oral irrigator with that of dental flossing in patients with fixed braces after 4 weeks of home-use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design is a randomized and single-blinded cross-over study. After 28 days using the products at home, hygiene indices (Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI); gingival bleeding index (GBI)) were compared between test (oral irrigator) and control product (dental floss). RESULTS: Seventeen adult individuals finalized the study. After 28 days of cleaning with the oral irrigator, RMNPI was 54.96% (46.91-66.05) compared to 52.98% (42.75-65.60) with dental floss (p = 0.029). Subgroup analysis revealed that the higher cleansing efficacy of the dental floss is attributable to buccal and marginal areas. GBI after the test phase with the oral irrigator was 12.96% (7.14-24.31) and statistically significantly higher compared to 8.33% (5.84-15.33) with dental floss (p = 0.030) which could be seen in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Oral irrigators do not remove plaque and reduce gingival bleeding as efficiently as dental floss in easily accessible regions. However, in posterior regions, where the patients struggled with the application of dental floss, the oral irrigator showed similar results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Oral irrigators should only be recommended to orthodontic patients who cannot use interdental brushes and are not compliant with dental flossing.