Efficacy of an experimental toothpaste containing sodium bicarbonate, sodium hyaluronate and sodium fluoride on gingivitis.

BACKGROUND: Gingivitis is driven by plaque accumulation and, if left untreated, can progress to irreversible periodontitis. For many, the mechanical action of toothbrushing does not achieve adequate plaque control. The aim of this study was to investigate whether twice-daily use of a toothpaste containing 0.2% high molecular weight (HMW) sodium hyaluronate with 67% sodium bicarbonate and 0.221% sodium fluoride (experimental toothpaste) could improve gingival health compared with a regular fluoride toothpaste (negative control). The study also assessed whether the experimental toothpaste could provide additive gingival health benefit over a toothpaste containing only 67% sodium bicarbonate and 0.221% sodium fluoride (positive control). METHODS: This was a single-center, examiner-blinded, randomized, clinical study in healthy adults with mild-to-moderate gingivitis. At baseline, after abstaining from toothbrushing for 12 h, prospective participants underwent oral soft tissue (OST) and oral hard tissue examination followed by assessments for gingival inflammation (Modified Gingival Index [MGI]), gingival bleeding (Bleeding Index [BI]), and supra-gingival plaque (Turesky Plaque Index [TPI]). Eligible participants were stratified by gender and baseline number of bleeding sites (low: <45; high: ≥45 bleeding sites). Following randomization, participants underwent prophylactic dental treatment. Participants received a full OST examination, MGI, BI and TPI assessments after 3 days, 1, 2 and 6 weeks of product use. RESULTS: In total, 110 participants were screened for study entry and all were randomized to receive one of three toothpastes (experimental: sodium hyaluronate, sodium bicarbonate, sodium fluoride; positive control: sodium bicarbonate, sodium fluoride; negative control: regular fluoride toothpaste). For all measures, significant improvements were observed in participants receiving either sodium bicarbonate-containing toothpaste (experimental or positive control) compared with the regular fluoride toothpaste (negative control) at week 6. No significant difference was observed in any assessment or visit comparing the experimental toothpaste with the positive control. CONCLUSIONS: Both the experimental and the positive control toothpastes demonstrated clinically relevant improvements in gingival health compared with a regular fluoride toothpaste (negative control). However, no additional gingival health improvement was observed for the experimental toothpaste compared with the positive control, therefore, no additional gingival health benefit can be attributed to the inclusion of sodium hyaluronate in this formulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04737538 (04/02/2021).

Effectiveness of a sonic-flosser toothbrush with different size brush heads and manual toothbrush plus dental floss on plaque, gingival bleeding and inflammation in adults with naturally occurring gingivitis: A 4-week randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of three oral hygiene groups: a novel sonic-flosser toothbrush with a compact brush head, a novel sonic-flosser toothbrush with a full size brush head and manual toothbrush plus dental floss on the reduction of gingival bleeding after 4 weeks. Secondarily, the groups were compared on the reduction of gingival inflammation and dental plaque. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and five (n = 105) healthy adults were enrolled in this randomized, examiner-blind, three-group, parallel clinical trial. Subjects were assigned to one of three groups: sonic-flosser toothbrush with full size brush head (SFF), sonic-flosser toothbrush with compact brush head (SFC), or manual toothbrush and string floss (MTF). Bleeding on probing (BOP), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) scores were recorded at baseline, 2-weeks, and 4-weeks. RESULTS: All subjects completed the study. All three groups demonstrated a significant reduction in BOP, MGI and RMNPI from baseline to 4-weeks for all areas recorded (p < 0.001), except gingival margin plaque scores for SFF, SFC and MTF (p = 0.203, p = 0.082, p = 0.324 respectively). Both the SFF and SFC groups were statistically more effective than MTF for whole mouth BOP, MGI and RMNPI (p < 0.001) and proximal areas (p = 0.022 or less). There were no adverse events reported by the subjects or identified by the examiner during the study. CONCLUSION: The sonic-flosser toothbrush with a full size or compact brush head was statistically and clinically more effective at improving gingival health and reducing plaque than manual toothbrush and dental floss for adults with naturally occurring gingivitis over 4-weeks.

Efficacy of water flossing on clinical parameters of inflammation and plaque: A 4-week randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary prevention of periodontitis is controlling gingivitis daily. The study objective was to compare the efficacy of a pulsating water flosser to a pulsating water flosser infused with air microbubbles on clinical signs of inflammation and plaque. METHODS: One hundred and five participants were enrolled in this single-blind, single-centre, parallel, 4-week, IRB/IEC-approved clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: water flosser (WF) plus manual toothbrush, water flosser infused with microbubbles of air (MBWF) plus manual toothbrush, or dental floss (DF) plus manual toothbrush. Bleeding on probing (BOP), Modified Gingival Index (MGI) and Rustogi Modification Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) scores were recorded at baseline, 2 and 4 weeks. RESULTS: All participants completed the study (n = 105). All groups showed a statistically significant reduction for BOP, MGI and RMNPI at 4 weeks (p < 0.05, except DF marginal RMNPI). The WF group showed a statistically significant greater reduction in whole mouth BOP (0.41) compared to MBWF (0.32) and DF (0.19). This was also true for MGI (0.37, 0.30 and 0.20, respectively) and RMNPI (0.13, 0.11 and 0.06, respectively; p < 0.05 for all comparisons). No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that a manual toothbrush and water flosser, with or without microbubbles, is an effective oral care regimen for controlling gingivitis over 4 weeks.

Gingival health effects with an oscillating-rotating electric toothbrush with micro-vibrations and a novel brush head designed for stain control: Results from a 12-week randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the reduction of plaque and gingivitis by an oscillating-rotating (O-R) smart-connected electric rechargeable toothbrush with micro-vibrations used with a novel brush head designed for stain control versus a manual toothbrush. METHODS: 100 adult subjects with evidence of gingivitis and plaque were enrolled in this single-center, examiner-blind, two-treatment, parallel-group, controlled trial. Subjects were randomized to either the O-R toothbrush used in whitening mode (Oral-B iO with Radiant White brush head) or the manual toothbrush (Oral-B Indicator). Subjects brushed twice daily with their assigned toothbrush and a standard sodium fluoride dentifrice. At baseline, week 1, and week 12, gingivitis was assessed with the Modified Gingival Index (MGI) and the Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), and plaque was assessed with the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). Gingival case status was classified as " healthy" (< 10% bleeding sites) or "not healthy" (≤ 10% bleeding sites) according to the standard of the American Academy of Periodontology and the European Federation of Periodontology. RESULTS: All 100 subjects who were randomized to treatment completed the study. At baseline, the gingival case status for all subjects was classified as "not healthy". By week 12, 86% of subjects in the O-R brush group had transitioned to a " healthy" case status, in contrast to 20% of subjects in the manual toothbrush group (P< 0.001). The reduction in the adjusted mean number of bleeding sites from baseline was greater for the O-R brush group than for the manual brush group [at week 12, by 24.5 (74.6%) vs. by 7.8 (23.7%), respectively; P< 0.001]. Reductions for adjusted mean MGI and GBI scores were likewise statistically significantly greater for the O-R brush group relative to those of the manual brush group (P< 0.001). The O-R brush also provided greater relative reductions in adjusted mean whole mouth, gingival margin and approximal RMNPI scores at week 12 (P< 0.001), and plaque was similarly reduced in the lingual and buccal subregions (P< 0.001). Significant between-group plaque reductions favoring the O-R brush were observed for all regions as early as first use (P< 0.001). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The results of this 12-week study support the recommendation of the O-R toothbrush with micro-vibrations, used in whitening mode with a novel brush head designed for stain control, so patients motivated by esthetic desires can personalize their brushing experience without compromising cleaning and gingival health efficacy.

A 6-month randomized controlled trial evaluating a novel smart-connected oscillating-rotating toothbrush versus a smart-connected sonic toothbrush for the reduction of plaque and gingivitis.

PURPOSE: This 6-month study compared the effects of a smart-connected oscillating-rotating (O-R) electric rechargeable toothbrush with micro-vibrations with those of a marketed smart-connected sonic rechargeable toothbrush for the reduction of gingivitis and plaque. METHODS: In this single-center, examiner-blind, two-treatment, open-label, parallel-group, randomized study, 110 adult subjects with evidence of gingivitis and plaque were randomized to use either the O-R brush (Oral-B iO) or the sonic brush (Philips Sonicare DiamondClean). Both groups were instructed to brush twice daily with a standard sodium fluoride dentifrice. Gingivitis and plaque were assessed at baseline, week 1, and week 24 using the Modified Gingival Index (MGI), Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), and the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). Designation of gingivitis case status as "healthy" or " not healthy" was made according to the World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. RESULTS: A significantly greater percentage of subjects in the O-R brush group versus the sonic brush group transitioned from " not healthy" to " healthy" gingivitis case status at week 24 (96.4% vs. 81.8%; P= 0.029). The O-R toothbrush produced a significantly greater reduction in adjusted mean MGI score, adjusted mean GBI score, and adjusted mean number of bleeding sites than did the sonic brush (week 24, by 32.6% for MGI score, by 23.7% for GBI score, and by 26.1% for number of bleeding sites, P< 0.001). After a single use on day 1, plaque removal was statistically significantly greater for the O-R brush compared to the sonic brush (P< 0.001); by week 24, the O-R brush demonstrated greater reductions in whole mouth plaque (24.6%), gingival margin plaque (61.9%) and approximal region plaque 25.8% (P≤ 0.007 for all) compared to the sonic brush. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This 6-month study provides evidence supporting use of a smart-connected O-R electric toothbrush with micro-vibrations for plaque removal and gingivitis reductions, resulting in transitions to a healthy gingival state.

Comparative plaque removal efficacy of a new children's powered toothbrush and a manual toothbrush: Randomized, single use clinical study.

PURPOSE: To compare the plaque removal efficacy of a new children's powered toothbrush to a children's manual toothbrush. METHODS: 55 subjects aged 5-8 years old, who met entry criteria, participated in this single-center, two-cell, examiner-blind, randomized, crossover, single use clinical study. Subjects brushed at home with their first assigned toothbrush and fluoride toothpaste, under supervision of a parent or legal guardian, at least once daily for 2 minutes during a 1-week acclimation period. After refraining from oral hygiene for 12-16 hours, and from eating and drinking for 4 hours, subjects returned to the clinical site where they were assessed for plaque using the Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). Subjects then brushed their teeth with their assigned toothbrush and toothpaste for 2 minutes and plaque levels were reassessed. Subjects were then given their second assigned toothbrush and the acclimation period and clinical site visit were repeated. Safety-in-use was also assessed during each clinic visit. Differences between pre-and post-brushing scores were analyzed for each toothbrush and between toothbrush groups for whole mouth plaque and 12 subset sites using baseline adjusted ANCOVA. RESULTS: Both toothbrushes significantly (P< 0.0001) reduced whole mouth and 12 subset site plaque scores from the pre-brushing baseline. Between treatment comparisons showed that use of the powered toothbrush resulted in statistically significant reductions in whole mouth plaque (55%, P< 0.0001) and in 12 subset site scores (40-208%) compared to the manual brush. This clinical study showed that brushing with a new children's powered toothbrush was safe and significantly more effective than brushing with a manual toothbrush in reducing whole mouth plaque scores, as well as plaque scores at a range of subset sites in the mouth. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This new powered toothbrush may enable children to safely achieve significant and meaningful improvements in oral hygiene compared to brushing with a manual toothbrush.

The effects of two baking-soda toothpastes in enhancing mechanical plaque removal and improving gingival health: A 6-month randomized clinical study.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness in reducing plaque and gingivitis of two fluoride toothpastes containing baking soda (35% and 20%) with a fluoride toothpaste control. METHODS: 319 subjects, who met entry criteria, participated in this single-center, three-cell, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group clinical study. Gingival Index (MGI), Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), and Plaque Index (PI) were assessed at baseline, and after 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: All three toothpastes significantly (P< 0.0001) reduced MGI, GBI, and PI versus baseline, and the two baking soda toothpastes significantly (P< 0.0001) reduced MGI, GBI, and PI compared to the fluoride control, at all three time points. After 6 months use, the 35% and 20% baking soda toothpastes had reduced MGI, GBI and PI by 15.0%, 46.9%, and 18.3%, and 9.4%, 25.9%, and 12.4%, respectively, compared to the control. In addition, the 35% baking soda toothpaste had reduced (P≤ 0.0005) MGI, GBI, and PI by 6.2%, 28.4%, and 6.8%, respectively, compared to the 20% baking soda toothpaste. This clinical study showed that brushing with fluoride toothpastes containing baking soda at 35% and 20% reduces plaque, gingival inflammation and bleeding more effectively than regular fluoride toothpaste. Further, it showed that 35% baking soda toothpaste was more effective in reducing these parameters than 20% baking soda toothpaste. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Fluoride toothpastes containing 20% or more baking soda can provide significant and meaningful gingival health benefits when used regularly as an adjunct to tooth brushing.

Enhanced plaque removal to improve gingival health: 3-month randomized clinical study of the effects of baking soda toothpaste on plaque and gingivitis.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness in reducing plaque and gingivitis of a fluoride toothpaste with 20% baking soda and a fluoride toothpaste control. METHODS: 159 subjects, who met the entry criteria, participated in this single-center, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group clinical study. Gingival Index (MGI), Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), and Plaque Index (PI) were assessed after 4, 8, and 12 weeks use of the assigned test or control toothpaste. After 12 weeks, participants resumed 4 weeks of their customary oral hygiene after which they were re-evaluated using the same measures. RESULTS: Both toothpastes statistically significantly reduced MGI, GBI, and PI versus baseline at all-time points. Brushing with the 20% baking soda toothpaste statistically significantly reduced MGI, PI, and GBI compared to the control toothpaste at all time points. After 12 weeks, the reductions in MGI, PI, and GBI were 12.6%, 9.6%, and 44.2%, respectively. After the 4-week customary oral hygiene period, the benefits of the study period had begun to diminish, but statistically significant reductions in MGI and GBI for the test versus control were still evident. This 3-month clinical study shows that brushing with fluoride toothpaste containing 20% baking soda reduces dental plaque and concurrently reduces gingival inflammation and bleeding compared to toothpaste with fluoride alone. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Fluoride toothpaste with 20% baking soda has the potential to offer multiple oral health benefits when used as an adjunct to regular tooth brushing and, therefore, may be confidently recommended to patients.

Randomised clinical studies investigating immediate and short-term efficacy of an occluding toothpaste in providing dentine hypersensitivity relief.

BACKGROUND: Dentine hypersensitivity (DH) can occur after gum recession or enamel loss and may impact quality of life. Treatments include toothpastes that decrease DH by occluding dentine tubules. One effective occluding ingredient used in toothpastes is stannous fluoride (SnF2), but this can be unstable in aqueous formulation. These three studies aimed to characterise the short-term effects of an experimental, anhydrous SnF2 dentifrice on DH. METHODS: Three examiner-blind, parallel-group studies evaluated DH in participants with the condition after a single brushing and after 3d brushing with an experimental anhydrous 0.454% SnF2/polyphosphate toothpaste (Test) or a toothpaste containing 0.76% sodium monofluorophosphate (Control). Test treatment participants brushed two pre-identified sensitive teeth first, then their remaining dentition for ≥1 min ('focused brushing'). Control treatment participants brushed their whole dentition for ≥1 min. DH was measured after single brushing and after 3d twice-daily use, via evaporative (air) (Schiff Sensitivity Scale) and tactile (Yeaple probe) stimuli and analysed using an ANCOVA model. RESULTS: In all studies, after 3d treatment, the Test toothpaste/brushing regimen significantly reduced DH compared to the Control regimen by both evaporative and tactile stimuli assessment (p < 0.0001 for all). The Test regimen also significantly reduced DH from baseline at both time-points by both measures in all studies (p < 0.0001 for all). Mean Schiff sensitivity score differences (95% confidence intervals) between Test and Control regimens after 3d were: Study 1: - 0.45 (- 0.577, - 0.319); Study 2: - 0.40 (- 0.505, - 0.300); Study 3: - 1.31 (- 1.500, - 1.128). Mean tactile score differences were: Study 1: 11.30 (7.927, 14.662); Study 2: 3.57 (2.531, 4.614); Study 3: 24.54 (20.349, 28.736). After single use, in Studies 2 and 3, the Test toothpaste/brushing regimen significantly reduced DH versus Control by both measures (p < 0.001 for all); in Study 1, treatment differences were not significant. Toothpastes were generally well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these studies indicated focused brushing with an experimental anhydrous 0.454% SnF2/polyphosphate toothpaste reduces DH compared to brushing with a conventional toothpaste after single use, with greater reduction after 3d. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registrations at ClinicalTrials.gov : Study 1: NCT02832375 (registered 26.July.2016); Study 2: NCT02731833 (registered 26.April.2016); Study 3: NCT02923895 (registered 5.October.2016).

A 5-week randomized clinical evaluation of a novel electric toothbrush head with regular and tapered bristles versus a manual toothbrush for reduction of gingivitis and plaque.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of an oscillating-rotating (O-R) electric rechargeable toothbrush with a novel round brush head comprised of regular and tapered bristles in reducing plaque and gingivitis versus a manual toothbrush. METHODS: This was a randomized, examiner-blind, parallel group, five-week study. Participants with mild-to-moderate plaque and gingivitis received an oral examination and were evaluated for baseline plaque (Rustogi Modified Navy Index), gingivitis (Modified Gingival Index) and gingival bleeding (Gingival Bleeding Index). Qualifying participants were randomly assigned to the novel Oral-B sensitive brush head (EB60) on an Oral-B Vitality O-R handle (D12) or an ADA manual toothbrush. Participants brushed twice daily with the assigned brush and a standard fluoride dentifrice for 5 weeks before returning for an oral examination and plaque and gingivitis evaluations. RESULTS: A total of 150 participants were randomized to treatment and completed the study (mean age = 45.7 years). Both brushes demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in number of bleeding sites versus baseline (P < 0.001). At Week 5, the number of bleeding sites was reduced from baseline by 11.15 (52.2%) for the O-R brush and 5.04 (23.6%) for the manual brush. The treatment difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Significant reductions versus baseline (P < 0.001) were also seen for both brushes for MGI, GBI and Rustogi plaque measures (whole mouth, gingival margin and proximal), but the O-R brush produced significantly greater reductions versus the manual brush (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The O-R handle and round brush head with tapered and regular bristles produced greater plaque and gingivitis reductions than the manual brush.

Evaluation of the Addition of a Water Flosser to Manual Brushing on Gingival Health.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare the use of a manual toothbrush plus water flosser to a manual toothbrush alone on clinical signs of inflammation. METHODS: Seventy-two subjects were randomized into two groups and completed this four-week, single-blind, parallel, clinical trial. Group 1 used a Waterpik®Water Flosser (WF) once daily and brushed with a manual toothbrush twice a day. Group 2 brushed twice a day with a manual toothbrush only (MT). Subjects in group 1 were provided written and verbal instructions for the water flosser and all participants used the toothpaste and manual brush provided, brushing as they normally do. Data were evaluated at baseline (BSL), two weeks (W2), and four weeks (W4) for bleeding on probing (BOP), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). RESULTS: Both groups showed a significant reduction from BSL for BOP, MGI, and RMNPI at W2 and W4, except for MT W2 facial proximal MGI (p = 0.153) and marginal RMNPI (p = 0.324). The WF was significantly more effective than the MT for reducing BOP, MGI, and RMNPI at W2 and W4 for all areas measured. The WF was 3.13 times as effective for reducing BOP, 2.69 times for MGI, and 2.44 times for RMNPI at W4 (p < 0.001) for whole mouth scores. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of the Waterpik®Water Flosser to manual tooth brushing is significantly more effective for improving gingival health than manual tooth brushing alone.

An 8-Week Clinical Comparison of an Oscillating-Rotating Electric Rechargeable Toothbrush and a Sonic Toothbrush in the Reduction of Gingivitis and Plaque.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of a marketed oscillating-rotating electric rechargeable toothbrush to a marketed sonic toothbrush in the reduction of gingivitis and plaque over an 8-week period. METHODS: This was a randomized, examiner-blind, parallel group, eight-week study. Subjects with presence of mild-to-moderate plaque and gingivitis received an oral examination and were evaluated for baseline gingivitis (Modified Gingival Index; MGI), gingival bleeding (Gingival Bleeding Index; GBI), and plaque (Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index). Qualified subjects were randomly assigned to an entry-level oscillating-rotating electric rechargeable brush handle (Oral-B® PRO 1000, D16U) with a round brush head with angled bristles (Oral-B® CrossAction, EB50) or a premium sonic brush (Philips Sonicare® Diamond Clean Toothbrush with AdaptiveClean brush head). One hundred and fifty subjects were instructed to brush twice daily with their assigned brush and a fluoride dentifrice for eight weeks before returning for an oral examination and gingivitis and plaque evaluations. The same methods were used at baseline and Week 8 for all evaluations. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-eight subjects completed the study, 74 in each group. After eight weeks of use, both brushes reduced MGI, GBI, total number of bleeding sites, whole mouth plaque, gingival margin plaque, and proximal plaque (p < 0.001 for each). The oscillating-rotating brush provided statistically significantly greater reductions than the sonic brush for all gingivitis measures, with a 34.8%, 48.4%, and 42.6% greater reduction for MGI, GBI, and number of bleeding sites, respectively, after eight weeks of use (p < 0.001 for each). Significantly greater whole mouth (26.2%) and proximal (38.5%) plaque reductions were also demonstrated at Week 8 for the oscillating-rotating brush versus the sonic brush (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The entry-level oscillating-rotating brush performed better than the premium sonic brush in the reduction of plaque and gingivitis in this eight-week randomized and examiner-blind study.

Assessment of the Effects of a Novel Stabilized Stannous Fluoride Dentifrice on Gingivitis in a Two-Month Positive-Controlled Clinical Study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the antibleeding/antigingivitis effectiveness of a newly formulated 0.454% stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice and a marketed positive control triclosan-containing dentifrice in adults with mild-to-moderate gingivitis. METHODS: This single-center, two-month, randomized and controlled, double-blind, parallel group clinical trial involved adults with preexisting mild-to-moderate gingivitis. Baseline bleeding and gingivitis levels were assessed with the Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI) and Lobene Modified Gingival Index (MGI). Subjects were randomly assigned to either a new smooth formula 0.454% stabilized stannous fluoride test dentifrice (Crest® Pro-Health™) or a commercially available positive control 0.30% triclosan dentifrice (Colgate® Total®). Subjects brushed with their assigned dentifrice at home according to the manufacturer's instructions. At Month 2, subjects were re-evaluated for bleeding and gingivitis as at Baseline, with MGI and GBI evaluations. RESULTS: Of the 200 subjects randomized to treatment, 197 completed the study and had fully evaluable data. At Month 2, both the stannous fluoride and triclosan control dentifrices produced statistically significant reductions (p < 0.0001) in the mean number of bleeding sites, MGI, and GBI compared to Baseline. Use of this 0.454% stannous fluoride dentifrice resulted in 22% fewer bleeding sites versus the positive control triclosan dentifrice (p < 0.0001). Similarly, after two months of brushing, the stannous fluoride dentifrice group showed statistically significant lower mean MGI and GBI scores than subjects using the triclosan positive control dentifrice (p < 0.0001). Both dentifrices were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects brushing with a newly formulated stannous fluoride dentifrice had statistically significantly fewer bleeding sites and less gingivitis than those using a positive control triclosan dentifrice after two months.

Comparative Antiplaque Effect of Two Antimicrobial Dentifrices: Laboratory and Clinical Evaluations.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect of a stannous fluoride dentifrice versus a triclosan-containing dentifrice on the reduction of plaque using in vitro and clinical models. METHODS: Both investigations evaluated a novel 0.454% stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice (Crest® Pro-Health™ smooth formula) versus a sodium fluoride/triclosan positive control dentifrice (Colgate® Total®). The in vitro evaluation utilized the Plaque Glycolysis and Regrowth Model (PGRM), wherein the metabolic effects (acid production/glycolysis inhibition) of the dentifrices were assessed on plaque biofilms grown on glass rods after three days growth and a single dentifrice treatment. Treatments were evaluated via analysis of variance, Student's t-test. The clinical trial was a four-week, single-center, randomized and controlled, double-blind, parallel group study, where 120 adults were randomized to one of the two dentifrices for use at home according to manufacturer's instructions. Plaque was evaluated at baseline and Week 4 with the Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). Statistical analyses were via analysis of covariance. RESULTS: In vitro PGRM: The stannous fluoride dentifrice provided 43.3% glycolysis inhibition compared to 27.5% for the triclosan control, and the pH decrease associated with acid production was significantly less for stannous fluoride (0.87) versus triclosan (1.11); p < 0.05. Clinical trial: One hundred eighteen (118) subjects completed the study with fully evaluable data. Both dentifrice groups demonstrated statistically significant (p < 0.0001) reductions in plaque at Week 4 compared with baseline, with the stannous fluoride dentifrice producing a significantly lower adjusted mean Week 4 plaque score (p < 0.0001) versus the triclosan positive control for whole mouth plaque (23.1% lower) and interproximal plaque (43.5% lower). Both dentifrices were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice provided statistically significant reductions in plaque glycolysis in vitro and plaque growth in vivo compared to the triclosan dentifrice. Results for both studies were consistent.

Comparison of Water Flosser and Interdental Brush on Reduction of Gingival Bleeding and Plaque: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this randomized, two-week, single blind, two-group parallel pilot study was to compare the reduction in gingival bleeding and plaque in subjects using a water flosser or interdental brush, each combined with a manual toothbrush. METHODS: Twenty-eight subjects completed the study. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Waterpik® Water Flosser (WF) plus manual toothbrush or interdental brushes (IDBs) plus a manual toothbrush. Bleeding on probing (BOP) was measured at six sites and reported for whole mouth, lingual, facial, and interproximal areas. Plaque data were measured using the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) and were reported for whole mouth, approximal, marginal, facial, and lingual areas. Subjects received verbal and written instructions on the use of their interdental product and demonstrated proficiency prior to starting the study. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups for BOP or RMNPI at baseline. Both groups demonstrated a significant reduction in BOP and RMNPI for all regions and areas measured from baseline to two weeks. The WF was more effective than the IDBs for BOP whole mouth (56%), facial (44%), approximal whole mouth (53%), and approximal facial (41%). Post hoc power analysis showed that the sample size was not adequate to detect a significant difference between groups for lingual and marginal assessments for BOP or any area for RMNPI. CONCLUSIONS: The Waterpik Water Flosser is more effective than IDBs for reducing gingival bleeding over two weeks.

Comparison of Water Flosser and Interdental Brush on Plaque Removal: A Single-Use Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this randomized, single-use, single-blind, two-group, parallel pilot study was to compare the plaque removal ability of a water flosser and interdental brush when used in combination with a manual toothbrush. METHODS: Twenty-eight (28) subjects completed the study. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Waterpik®Water Flosser (WF) plus manual tooth brushing or interdental brushes (IDB) plus manual tooth brushing. Pre-cleaning plaque scores were obtained using the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). Subjects were instructed on the use of their interdental product. Post-cleaning scores were obtained after a supervised brushing and use of the interdental device. Scores were recorded for whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, and lingual regions for each subject. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups for pre-cleaning plaque scores for whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, or lingual regions. Both groups showed significant reductions in plaque from baseline for all areas measured (p < 0.001). The WF group was significantly more effective than the IDB group for removing plaque from all areas measured. Specifically, the WF was 18% more effective for whole mouth and marginal areas, 20% for approximal areas, 11% for facial areas, and 29% for lingual areas. CONCLUSIONS: The Waterpik Water Flosser and manual toothbrush removes significantly more plaque from tooth surfaces (whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, and lingual) than interdental brushes and a manual toothbrush after a single use.

Efficacy of Two Interdental Cleaning Devices on Clinical Signs of Inflammation: A Four-Week Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the reduction of the clinical signs of inflammation by two power interdental cleaning devices combined with a manual toothbrush. METHODS: Sixty-nine subjects completed this randomized, four-week, single-blind, two-group, parallel clinical study. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: Waterpik Water Flosser (WF) plus a manual toothbrush; or Sonicare Air Floss Pro (AFP) plus a manual toothbrush. All subjects received both written and verbal instructions and demonstrated proficiency prior to starting the study. Instructions were reviewed at the two-week visit (W2). Data were evaluated for whole mouth, lingual, and facial areas for bleeding on probing (BOP) and Modified Gingival Index (MGI). Plaque data were recorded for whole mouth, lingual, facial, approximal, and marginal areas of the tooth using the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). BOP, MGI, and RMNPI were scored at baseline (BSL), two weeks, and four weeks (W4). RESULTS: Both groups showed significant reductions in BOP and MGI from baseline for all regions and time points measured (p < 0.001). Both groups showed significant reductions from baseline for all areas at W4 for RMNPI (p < 0.001). The WF group was significantly more effective than the AFP group at reducing bleeding and gingivitis for all areas measured at all time points. At W4, the WF group was 54% more effective for bleeding and 32% for gingivitis (p < 0.001). Plaque accumulation was significantly less at W4 for the WF group compared to the AFP group (28%, p 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: The Waterpik Water Flosser is significantly more effective than the Sonicare Air Floss Pro for reducing clinical signs of inflammation.

An Eight-Week Clinical Evaluation of an Oscillating-Rotating Power Toothbrush with a Brush Head Utilizing Angled Bristles Compared with a Sonic Toothbrush in the Reduction of Gingivitis and Plaque.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of an oscillating-rotating (O-R) power toothbrush with a brush head utilizing angled bristles to a marketed sonic toothbrush in the reduction of plaque and gingivitis over an eight-week period. METHODS: This study used a randomized, examiner-blind, single-center, two-treatment, parallel group, eight-week design. Subjects with mild-to-moderate plaque and gingivitis were evaluated for baseline whole mouth, gingival margin, and approximal plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding. Clinical assessments were performed using the Modified Gingival Index, Gingival Bleeding Index, and the Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index. Subjects received either the O-R brush (Oral-B Professional Care 1000 [D16u] with Oral-B CrossAction brush head [EB50]) or the sonic brush (Sonicare DiamondClean with the standard DiamondClean brush head). Subjects brushed twice daily for two minutes per brushing with the assigned brush and a standard fluoride dentifrice for eight weeks before returning for plaque and gingivitis evaluations using the same methods. Prior to baseline and Week 8 measurements, participants abstained from oral hygiene for 12 hours. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-eight subjects completed the study; 75 in the O-R group and 73 in the sonic group. Both brushes demonstrated statistically significant reductions in plaque and gingivitis over the eight-week study period (p < 0.00 1). The O-R brush was statistically significantly more effective in reducing plaque and gingivitis than the sonic brush. Whole mouth, gingival margin, and approximal plaque reductions were 27.7%, 46.8%, and 29.3% greater, respectively, compared with the sonic brush, while the reductions in gingivitis, gingival bleeding, and number of bleeding sites were 34.6%, 36.4%, and 36.1% greater, respectively, for the O-R brush than for the sonic brush (p < 0.001 for all six measures). No adverse events were observed for either brush. CONCLUSION: The plaque and gingivitis reductions for the O-R power brush incorporating the angled-bristled brush head were significantly greater than for the sonic power brush.

A clinical study to assess the effect of a stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice on hypersensitivity relative to a marketed sodium fluoride/triclosan control.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of a marketed stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF2) dentifrice in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity as compared to a marketed sodium fluoride (NaF)/triclosan dentifrice over an eight-week period. METHODS: Adults with confirmed dentinal hypersensitivity were enrolled in this randomized and controlled, parallel group, double blind, eight-week, single-center clinical trial. Random assignment to one of two dentifrice test groups via age, gender, and thermal sensitivity of enrolled test teeth was performed at baseline, with subjects assigned to twice-daily unsupervised brushing with either the marketed SnF2 dentifrice (Oral-B Pro-Expert, 0.454% SnF2 plus 0.077% NaF) or the marketed 0.32% NaF with 0.3% triclosan/copolymer dentifrice control (Colgate Total Advanced). Tactile sensitivity (Yeaple Probe) and thermal sensitivity (airblast/Schiff Air Index) evaluations of the selected test teeth were performed at baseline pre-treatment, and again at Weeks 2 and 8 of product use to compare the dentifrices' relative hypersensitivity protection effectiveness. RESULTS: Ninety-seven (97) of the 100 enrolled subjects completed the trial and were fully evaluable. At both Week 2 and Week 8, for both the thermal and tactile evaluation measurements, subjects brushing with the marketed SnF2 dentifrice experienced statistically significantly (p < 0.0001) superior average dentinal hypersensitivity improvement versus subjects assigned to the NaF/triclosan control dentifrice. Between groups, superior relative mean reduction in thermal Schiff Air Index favored SnF2 by 24% at Week 2 and 68% at Week 8, while greater relative mean tactile Yeaple Probe benefits were observed for SnF2 relative to the control by 114% after Week 2 and 184% at Week 8. The dentifrices were well-tolerated. CONCLUSION: Twice-daily brushing with a marketed SnF2 dentifrice provided superior dentinal hypersensitivity improvement versus a commercially available NaF/triclosan dentifrice, with significantly (p < 0.0001) greater relief after two weeks, and even larger relative benefits at eight weeks.

Evaluation of anti-gingivitis benefits of stannous fluoride dentifrice among triclosan dentifrice users.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the anti-gingivitis benefits of a 0.454% highly bioavailable stannous fluoride dentifrice (SnF2) relative to a 0.3% triclosan/copolymer dentifrice (triclosan/copolymer) among triclosan/copolymer dentifrice users with residual gingivitis. METHODS: This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind, parallel group, 2-month clinical study. Self-reported triclosan/copolymer dentifrice users were recruited and provided with triclosan/copolymer dentifrice to use for 1 month. After this 1-month acclimation period, subjects who had residual gingivitis at the baseline visit were randomized to either the SnF2 dentifrice or the triclosan/copolymer dentifrice (positive control). Subjects performed their treatment unsupervised using their assigned dentifrice following manufacturers' usage instructions for 2 months. The Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI) and Modified Gingival Index (MGI) were used to measure gingivitis benefits at baseline and Month 2. An analysis of covariance was performed to compare treatment groups for the post-baseline scores as well as change from baseline, with the baseline score as a covariate. All comparisons were two-sided at the 0.05 level of significance. RESULTS: A total of 150 subjects were randomized to treatment. Both treatment groups experienced significant reductions in number of bleeding sites, gingival bleeding index (GBI), and gingival inflammation (MGI) relative to baseline (P < 0.001). At Month 2, the SnF2 dentifrice group demonstrated significantly lower adjusted mean scores versus the triclosan/copolymer group for number of bleeding sites, GBI, and MGI (P < 0.001). Between-treatment group comparisons for change from baseline values showed that the improvement in number of bleeding sites from baseline for the SnF2 group was 49% greater versus that of the triclosan/copolymer group (P < 0.001), and the GBI and MGI improvements from baseline for the SnF2 group were 48% and 37%, greater, respectively, relative to the triclosan/copolymer group (P < 0.001).