Introducing dental hygienists in general practice to research - an in-practice evaluation programme in the United Kingdom.

AIM: To introduce dental hygienists (DHs) in the UK to the principles of research through a practice-based product evaluation programme. METHODS: The programme consisted of an initial training and orientation day with presentations on evidence-based practice, research methods and the structure of research papers. The programme and its aims were explained in detail, and participants were briefed on the methods to be used. Participants then recruited seven to ten patients from their practices (offices), carried out a baseline assessment of: plaque, gingival health, calculus and staining at anterior teeth, and gave the patients a questionnaire asking about their teeth and then provided a 3-month supply of a test toothpaste. About 10 weeks later, a follow-up assessment of the same variables was performed and the questionnaire was repeated. A second training day followed during which the DHs provided feedback of their experiences and received training in literature searching and critical appraisal of literature including interpretation of results. RESULTS: Sixty-five DHs attended the first training day; 31 were able to recruit sufficient patients and attend the second training day. The DHs recruited 168 patients who received baseline and follow-up assessments. All the variables improved overall. Feedback from the DHs was very positive, and patients expressed delight with the care they had received. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative feedback for participating DHs suggests the programme met its aim and could be used in the future as a mechanism for helping DHs who want to increase their understanding of research methodology.

Comparison of the clinical effects and gingival abrasion aspects of manual and electric toothbrushes.

AIMS: The clinical effects and gingival abrasion aspects of 2 electrical tooth-brushes (Braun Oral-B Plak Control Ultra and the novel development Braun Oral-B Plak Control 3D) were to be compared with conventional manual tooth-brushing. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a cross-over study, 26 dental student volunteers participated and were assigned to 1 of 3 groups. Following instruction in the use of the electric as well as manual toothbrushes, the volunteers were timed for 2 min each day to apply one electric or the manual toothbrush, respectively, during 3 experimental phases of 2 weeks. No other methods of tooth cleaning were to be performed except the one specified for the respective test period. When brushing manually, the Bass toothbrushing technique was applied. Between each test period, a recovery period of 1 week was allowed during which no oral hygiene was performed at all. At the start and the end of each of the experimental periods, the extension of plaque deposits from the gingival margin in coronal direction was assessed using the Turesky et al. modification of the Quigley and Hein plaque index. Presence or absence of gingival inflammation was evaluated by bleeding and probing (BOP). The extent and severity of gingival abrasions were assessed by use of a modified method of Breitenmoser et al. and adapted by Danser et al. RESULTS: The plaque-reducing effect was similar in all groups with the same cleaning regime. For that reason, the result of the different experimental phases with the respective cleaning modalities were collapsed. Cleaning with the Braun Oral-B Plak Control Ultra electric toothbrush resulted consistently in the lowest plaque scores when compared to both the Braun Oral-B Plak Control 3D and the manual toothbrush. Although the differences in plaque reduction were statistically significant between cleaning with Braun Oral-B Plak Control Ultra and 3D, they were small and of questionable clinical relevance. No significant differences in plaque reductions were found between manual brushing and any of the 2 electric brushes. Gingival abrasions were least pronounced following brushing with the Braun Oral-B Plak Control 3D electric toothbrush. However, no significant differences in gingival abrasion were encountered following brushing with the Braun Oral-B Plak Control Ultra electric in comparison with the manual toothbrush. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study have shown that in a group of dental students trained in manual brushing technique, where efficacy was similar with the 3 toothbrushes tested, there is no evidence of greater gingival abrasion with either Braun Oral-B Plak Control Ultra or 3D when compared with a manual brush.

The simplified papilla preservation flap in the regenerative treatment of deep intrabony defects: clinical outcomes and postoperative morbidity.

BACKGROUND: The aims of the present multi-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial were: 1) to compare the efficacy of the simplified papilla preservation flap with and without a barrier membrane in deep intrabony defects; 2) to evaluate the postoperative morbidity and surgical complications; and 3) to preliminarily test the impact of baseline tooth mobility on clinical outcomes. METHODS: This parallel group, randomized, multi-center, controlled clinical trial involved 112 patients in 8 periodontal practices in 4 countries. A deep intrabony defect in each patient was accessed with the simplified papilla preservation flap. In the test defects, a bioabsorbable membrane was positioned. Patients' experiences with the surgical procedure and postoperative period were evaluated with a questionnaire. Clinical outcomes included clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing depth (PD) changes. RESULTS: Complete observations were available for 55 test and 54 control defects. CAL gains at 1 year were 3.5 +/- 2.1 mm in the guided tissue regeneration (GTR) group and 2.6 +/- 1.8 mm in the control group (P = 0.0117). CAL gains > or = 4 mm were observed in 50.9% of GTR sites and 33.3% of control sites. A significant center effect of 2.1 mm was observed (P= 0.01). Initial PD (P= 0.01) and baseline tooth mobility (P= 0.036) were significant covariates. During the procedure, 30.4% of test and 28.6% of controls reported feeling moderate pain, and subjects estimated the hardship of the procedure at 24 +/- 25 visual analog scale (VAS) units in the test group, and at 22 +/- 23 VAS in controls. In terms of the investigated outcomes, differences between test and control groups were not statistically significant. Among the postoperative complications, edema was most prevalent at week 1, and more frequently associated with the test treatment (P= 0.01). In the test group, 53.6% of membranes were exposed at week 3. CONCLUSIONS: The present study further supports the added benefits of guided tissue regeneration with respect to access flap alone in the treatment of deep intrabony defects, as well as the general efficacy of GTR in different clinical settings. Furthermore, our study indicates a possible influence of baseline tooth mobility on clinical outcomes.

Generalizability of the added benefits of guided tissue regeneration in the treatment of deep intrabony defects. Evaluation in a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown that GTR therapy of intrabony defects results in significantly better outcomes than access flap alone. Most of the available data, however, have been produced in highly controlled research environments by a small group of investigators. Generalizability of results to different clinicians and different subject populations has not been evaluated so far. METHODS: This parallel group study involved 143 patients recruited in a practice-based research network of 11 offices in 7 countries. It was designed to evaluate: 1) the applicability of the documented added benefits of GTR in the treatment of intrabony defects to different populations, and 2) the generalizability of the expected results to different clinicians. GTR was compared to access flap alone. Defects, one in each patient, were accessed with a previously described papilla preservation flap in both the test and control group. In addition, GTR sites received application of a bioabsorbable poly-D,L-lactide-co-glycolide membrane. A stringent plaque control regimen was enforced in all patients during the 1-year observation period. Outcomes included gains in clinical attachment (CAL) and reductions in probing depth. RESULTS: Observed gains in CAL were 2.18 +/- 1.46 mm for access flap and 3.04 +/- 1.64 mm for the GTR-treated group. The treatment-associated difference was statistically significant (P = 0.03) after correcting for both center effect and defect anatomy. Among the various centers, a 1.73 mm difference in CAL gain was observed. This is a clinically relevant amount, which underlines the significance of center variability in the outcome of periodontal surgical procedures. A frequency distribution analysis of the obtained CAL gains indicated that GTR treatment of deep intrabony defects decreased, with respect to the access flap control, the probability of obtaining only a modest attachment gain at 1 year. Conversely, CAL gains of 4 mm or more were observed in more than 40% of GTR-treated defects and in less than 20% of the controls (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that GTR therapy of deep intrabony defects performed by different clinicians on various patient populations resulted in both greater amounts and improved predictability of CAL gains than access flap alone.