Effect of environmental and socioeconomic factors on the use of dental floss among children: a hierarchical approach.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of environmental and socioeconomic characteristics with the use of dental floss in preschool children. This cross-sectional study was conducted with a sample of 402 preschool children aged 1-5 years, from Santa Cruz do Sul, a Southern city in Brazil. Mothers answered questions about environmental, demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics. Behavior variables as use of dental floss (study outcome) and dental attendance were also evaluated. Poisson regression analysis with robust variance through a hierarchical approach was used to investigate the association of explanatory variables for use of dental floss. Prevalence ratio (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were estimated. The mean sample age was 3.32 years (standard deviation [SD] 1.10). Of the included children, 291 (73.12%) did not use dental floss. The environmental model indicated that children who attended daycare (PR 2.53; 95%CI 1.39-4.60) and those whose parents were members of volunteer networks (RP 1.58; 95%CI 1.02-2.46) were more likely to use dental floss. Children from families with higher income (PR 1.55; 95%CI 1.07-2.24) and maternal schooling (PR 2.21; 95%CI 1.31-3.74) presented a higher prevalence of dental floss use. Older children and those who attended dental services were also related to higher dental floss use. Our findings suggest that children who live in a supporting environment and those with a higher socioeconomic status are more likely to use dental floss.

Effect of environmental and socioeconomic factors on the use of dental floss among children: a hierarchical approach

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of environmental and socioeconomic characteristics with the use of dental floss in preschool children. This cross-sectional study was conducted with a sample of 402 preschool children aged 1-5 years, from Santa Cruz do Sul, a Southern city in Brazil. Mothers answered questions about environmental, demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics. Behavior variables as use of dental floss (study outcome) and dental attendance were also evaluated. Poisson regression analysis with robust variance through a hierarchical approach was used to investigate the association of explanatory variables for use of dental floss. Prevalence ratio (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were estimated. The mean sample age was 3.32 years (standard deviation [SD] 1.10). Of the included children, 291 (73.12%) did not use dental floss. The environmental model indicated that children who attended daycare (PR 2.53; 95%CI 1.39-4.60) and those whose parents were members of volunteer networks (RP 1.58; 95%CI 1.02-2.46) were more likely to use dental floss. Children from families with higher income (PR 1.55; 95%CI 1.07-2.24) and maternal schooling (PR 2.21; 95%CI 1.31-3.74) presented a higher prevalence of dental floss use. Older children and those who attended dental services were also related to higher dental floss use. Our findings suggest that children who live in a supporting environment and those with a higher socioeconomic status are more likely to use dental floss.

Moderate quality evidence finds statistical benefit in oral health for powered over manual toothbrushes.

DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, Embase, CINAHL, National Institutes of Health Trials Register and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. Reference lists of identified articles were also scanned for relevant papers. Identified manufacturers were contacted for additional information. STUDY SELECTION: Only randomised controlled trials comparing manual and powered toothbrushes were considered. Crossover trials were eligible for inclusion if the wash-out period length was more than two weeks. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study assessment and data extraction were carried out independently by at least two reviewers. The primary outcome measures were quantified levels of plaque or gingivitis. Risk of bias assessment was undertaken. Standard Cochrane methodological approaches were taken. Random-effects models were used provided there were four or more studies included in the meta-analysis, otherwise fixed-effect models were used. Data were classed as short term (one to three months) and long term (greater than three months). RESULTS: Fifty-six trials were included with 51 (4624 patients) providing data for meta-analysis. The majority (46) were at unclear risk of bias, five at high risk of bias and five at low risk. There was moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes provide a statistically significant benefit compared with manual toothbrushes with regard to the reduction of plaque in both the short and long-term. This corresponds to an 11% reduction in plaque for the Quigley Hein index (Turesky) in the short term and a 21% reduction in the long term. There was a high degree of heterogeneity that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups.There was also moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes again provide a statistically significant reduction in gingivitis when compared with manual toothbrushes both in the short and long term. This corresponds to a 6% and 11% reduction in gingivitis for the Löe and Silness indices respectively. Again there was a high degree of heterogeneity that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups. The greatest body of evidence was for rotation oscillation brushes which demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in plaque and gingivitis at both time points. CONCLUSIONS: Powered toothbrushes reduce plaque and gingivitis more than manual toothbrushing in the short and long term. The clinical importance of these findings remains unclear. Observation of methodological guidelines and greater standardisation of design would benefit both future trials and meta-analyses. Cost, reliability and side effects were inconsistently reported. Any reported side effects were localised and only temporary.

Powered versus manual toothbrushing for oral health.

BACKGROUND: Removing dental plaque may play a key role maintaining oral health. There is conflicting evidence for the relative merits of manual and powered toothbrushing in achieving this. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003, and previously updated in 2005. OBJECTIVES: To compare manual and powered toothbrushes in everyday use, by people of any age, in relation to the removal of plaque, the health of the gingivae, staining and calculus, dependability, adverse effects and cost. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 23 January 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 23 January 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 23 January 2014) and CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 23 January 2014). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of at least four weeks of unsupervised powered toothbrushing versus manual toothbrushing for oral health in children and adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Random-effects models were used provided there were four or more studies included in the meta-analysis, otherwise fixed-effect models were used. Data were classed as short term (one to three months) and long term (greater than three months). MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-six trials met the inclusion criteria; 51 trials involving 4624 participants provided data for meta-analysis. Five trials were at low risk of bias, five at high and 46 at unclear risk of bias.There is moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes provide a statistically significant benefit compared with manual toothbrushes with regard to the reduction of plaque in both the short term (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.70 to -0.31); 40 trials, n = 2871) and long term (SMD -0.47 (95% CI -0.82 to -0.11; 14 trials, n = 978). These results correspond to an 11% reduction in plaque for the Quigley Hein index (Turesky) in the short term and 21% reduction long term. Both meta-analyses showed high levels of heterogeneity (I(2) = 83% and 86% respectively) that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups.With regard to gingivitis, there is moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes again provide a statistically significant benefit when compared with manual toothbrushes both in the short term (SMD -0.43 (95% CI -0.60 to -0.25); 44 trials, n = 3345) and long term (SMD -0.21 (95% CI -0.31 to -0.12); 16 trials, n = 1645). This corresponds to a 6% and 11% reduction in gingivitis for the Löe and Silness index respectively. Both meta-analyses showed high levels of heterogeneity (I(2) = 82% and 51% respectively) that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups.The number of trials for each type of powered toothbrush varied: side to side (10 trials), counter oscillation (five trials), rotation oscillation (27 trials), circular (two trials), ultrasonic (seven trials), ionic (four trials) and unknown (five trials). The greatest body of evidence was for rotation oscillation brushes which demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in plaque and gingivitis at both time points. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Powered toothbrushes reduce plaque and gingivitis more than manual toothbrushing in the short and long term. The clinical importance of these findings remains unclear. Observation of methodological guidelines and greater standardisation of design would benefit both future trials and meta-analyses.Cost, reliability and side effects were inconsistently reported. Any reported side effects were localised and only temporary.

Investigation of wear in manual toothbrushes from different price categories.

This clinical study examined differences in wear in manual toothbrushes from different price categories. 140 volunteers (14 groups of 10) brushed twice daily for 2-3 minutes over a period of three or six months using the modified Bass technique and seven different toothbrushes (TB) from three price categories. A: 2 TB for under 1 Euro; B: 2 TB priced between 1 and 2 Euro; C: 3 TB priced at over 2 Euro. After a period of three or six months the increase in the bristle surface field was determined and the brush heads were rated macroscopically, by light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (grades 1-4: new, small, clear or very clear signs of use). The statistical analysis was performed with the Mann-Whitney U-test and Error Rates method (p < or = 0.05). All bristle fields showed an increase in surface area over the period of use. When examined macroscopically and under light microscopy, very little difference was found between three and six months of use, or between brushes from the same price category. The clearest distinction was found between categories B and C, whereby C was rated worse. In SEM it was difficult to separate the findings according to price categories. Here, the scores most often awarded were 3 and 4. The results of the three test methods differed markedly from one another. Thus no conclusions on the state of the bristles can be drawn from a marked increase in bristle field surface area. The category B TB tended to perform best.

Over-the-counter whitening agents: a concise review.

Tooth discoloration is commonly found in the dental clinic and tooth bleaching has been considered the preferred esthetic alternative, being more conservative, safe and with predictable results. Supervised home-use of 10% Carbamide Peroxide (CP) bleaching with custom-trays is the most common bleaching procedure dispensed by dentists to their patients. The good results obtained with this technique stimulated the flourishing of new products and techniques. Over-the-counter (OTC) bleaching products appeared as a low-cost alternative to bleach discolored teeth without dentist supervision. Different OTC products are available in supermarkets, drug stores or on the Internet, including rinses, paint-on brushes, toothpastes, chewing guns, dental floss, and whitening strips. There is lack of clinical evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of these products, being most of the studies supported by the manufacturers'. Basically, toothpastes, chewing gums, and dental floss are removal agents of superficial stains. Rinses and paint-on brushes with low levels of hydrogen peroxide have some whitening effect, but without clinical relevance. Strips present similar esthetic results and side-effects, compared to bleaching with 10% CP using trays; however, the studies have financial support from the manufacturers and were based on short term evaluations. Legislation varies widely in different countries regarding OTC dental bleaching. Concerns have appeared due to the potential abusive use of these self-medication agents, especially in young patients, with potential harmful results. Dentists should be acquainted with this kind of products to be able to inform their patients. In conclusion, there is a need for independent clinical trials to provide sufficient evidence regarding the use of OTC bleaching products.

Continuous positive airway pressure devices for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea syndrome: a systematic review and economic analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) devices for the treatment of obstructive apnoea-hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS), compared with the best supportive care, placebo and dental devices. DATA SOURCES: The main search was of fifteen electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library, up to November 2006. REVIEW METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CPAP with best supportive/usual care, placebo, and dental devices in adults with a diagnosis of OSAHS were included. The primary outcomes of interest were subjective daytime sleepiness assessed by the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and objective sleepiness assessed by the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) and the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT). A new economic model was developed to assess incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The cost-effectiveness of CPAP was compared with that of the use of dental devices and conservative management. The costs and QALYs were compared over a lifetime time horizon. Effectiveness was based on the RCT evidence on sleepiness symptoms (ESS), which was 'mapped' to utilities using individual patient data from a subset of studies. Utilities were expressed on the basis of generic HRQoL instruments [the EQ-5D (EuroQoL-5 Dimensions) in the base-case analysis]. The base-case analysis focused on a male aged 50. A series of subgroup and scenario analyses were also undertaken. RESULTS: The searches yielded 6325 citations, from which 48 relevant clinical effectiveness studies were identified, 29 of these providing data on daytime sleepiness. The majority of the included RCTs did not report using an adequate method of allocation concealment or use an intention-to-treat analysis. Only the studies using a sham CPAP comparator were double blinded. There was a statistically significant benefit with CPAP compared with control (placebo and conservative treatment/usual care) on the ESS [mean difference (MD) -2.7 points, 95% CI -3.45 to -1.96]. However, there was statistical heterogeneity, which was reduced when trials were subgrouped by severity of disease. There was also a significant benefit with CPAP compared with usual care on the MWT. There was a non-statistically significant difference between CPAP and dental devices (six trials) in the impact on daytime sleepiness (ESS) among a population with moderate symptom severity at baseline (MD -0.9, 95% CI -2.1 to 0.4). A review of five studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of CPAP was undertaken. All existing cost-effectiveness studies had limitations; therefore a new economic model was developed, based on which it was found that, on average, CPAP was associated with higher costs and benefits than dental devices or conservative management. The incremental cost per QALY gained of CPAP was below 20,000 pounds in the base-case analysis and most alternative scenarios. There was a high probability of CPAP being more cost-effective than dental devices and conservative management for a cost-effectiveness threshold of 20,000 pounds per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: CPAP is an effective and cost-effective treatment for OSAHS compared with conservative/usual care and placebo in populations with moderate to severe daytime sleepiness, and there may be benefits when the disease is mild. Dental devices may be a treatment option in moderate disease but some uncertainty remains. Further research would be potentially valuable, particularly investigation of the effectiveness of CPAP for populations with mild sleepiness and further trials comparing CPAP with dental devices.

Over-the-counter whitening agents: a concise review

Tooth discoloration is commonly found in the dental clinic and tooth bleaching has been considered the preferred esthetic alternative, being more conservative, safe and with predictable results. Supervised home-use of 10 percent Carbamide Peroxide (CP) bleaching with custom-trays is the most common bleaching procedure dispensed by dentists to their patients. The good results obtained with this technique stimulated the flourishing of new products and techniques. Over-the-counter (OTC) bleaching products appeared as a low-cost alternative to bleach discolored teeth without dentist supervision. Different OTC products are available in supermarkets, drug stores or on the Internet, including rinses, paint-on brushes, toothpastes, chewing guns, dental floss, and whitening strips. There is lack of clinical evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of these products, being most of the studies supported by the manufacturers'. Basically, toothpastes, chewing gums, and dental floss are removal agents of superficial stains. Rinses and paint-on brushes with low levels of hydrogen peroxide have some whitening effect, but without clinical relevance. Strips present similar esthetic results and side-effects, compared to bleaching with 10 percent CP using trays; however, the studies have financial support from the manufacturers and were based on short term evaluations. Legislation varies widely in different countries regarding OTC dental bleaching. Concerns have appeared due to the potential abusive use of these self-medication agents, especially in young patients, with potential harmful results. Dentists should be acquainted with this kind of products to be able to inform their patients. In conclusion, there is a need for independent clinical trials to provide sufficient evidence regarding the use of OTC bleaching products.

Manual versus powered toothbrushing for oral health.

BACKGROUND: Removing dental plaque may play a key role maintaining oral health. There is conflicting evidence for the relative merits of manual and powered toothbrushing in achieving this. OBJECTIVES: To compare manual and powered toothbrushes in relation to the removal of plaque, the health of the gingivae, staining and calculus, dependability, adverse effects and cost. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 17/06/2004) and Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2004); MEDLINE (January 1966 to week 2 June 2004); EMBASE (January 1980 to week 2 2004) and CINAHL (January 1982 to week 2 June 2004). Manufacturers were contacted for additional data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were selected for the following criteria: design-random allocation of participants; participants - general public with uncompromised manual dexterity; intervention - unsupervised manual and powered toothbrushing for at least 4 weeks. Primary outcomes were the change in plaque and gingivitis over that period. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Six authors independently extracted information. The effect measure for each meta-analysis was the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. Potential sources of heterogeneity were examined, along with sensitivity analyses for quality and publication bias. For discussion purposes SMD was translated into percentage change. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-two trials, involving 3855 participants, provided data. Brushes with a rotation oscillation action removed plaque and reduced gingivitis more effectively than manual brushes in the short term and reduced gingivitis scores in studies over 3 months. For plaque at 1 to 3 months the SMD was -0.43 (95% CI: -0.72 to -0.14), for gingivitis SMD -0.62 (95% CI: -0.90 to -0.34) representing an 11% difference on the Quigley Hein plaque index and a 6% reduction on the Loe and Silness gingival index. At over 3 months the SMD for plaque was -1.29 (95% CI: -2.67 to 0.08) and for gingivitis was -0.51 (-0.76 to -0.25) representing a 17% reduction on the Ainamo Bay bleeding on probing index. There was heterogeneity between the trials for the short-term follow up. Sensitivity analyses revealed the results to be robust when selecting trials of high quality. There was no evidence of any publication bias. No other powered designs were as consistently superior to manual toothbrushes.Cost, reliability and side effects were inconsistently reported. Any reported side effects were localised and temporary. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Powered toothbrushes with a rotation oscillation action reduce plaque and gingivitis more than manual toothbrushing. Observation of methodological guidelines and greater standardisation of design would benefit both future trials and meta-analyses.

Manual versus powered toothbrushing for oral health.

BACKGROUND: Specific oral bacteria, generically known as "dental plaque" are the primary cause of gingivitis (gum disease) and caries. The removal of dental plaque is thought to play a key role in the maintenance of oral health. There is conflicting evidence for the relative merits of manual and powered toothbrushing in achieving this. OBJECTIVES: To compare manual and powered toothbrushes in relation to the removal of plaque, the health of the gingivae, staining and calculus, dependability, adverse effects and cost. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 22/8/02); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2002); MEDLINE (January 1966 to week 5 2002); EMBASE (January 1980 to week 3 July 2002) and CINAHL (January 1982 to June 2002). Manufacturers of powered toothbrushes were contacted for additional published and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design-random allocation of participants; participants-general public with uncompromised manual dexterity; intervention- supervised manual and powered toothbrushing for at least four weeks; primary outcomes-the change in plaque and gingivitis over that period. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Six reviewers independently extracted information in duplicate. Indices for plaque and gingivitis were expressed as standardised values for each study. The effect measure for each meta-analysis was the standardised mean difference (SMD) with the appropriate 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random effect models. Potential sources of heterogeneity were examined, along with sensitivity analyses for the items assessed for quality and publication bias. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-nine trials, involving 2,547 participants, provided data for the meta-analysis. Brushes that worked with a rotation oscillation action removed more plaque and reduced gingivitis more effectively than manual brushes in the short and long term. For plaque at one to three months the SMD was -0.44 (95% CI: -0.66 to -0.21), for gingivitis SMD -0.44 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.15). These represented an 11% reduction on the Quigley Hein plaque index and a 6% reduction on the Löe and Silness gingival index. At over three months the effects were SMD for plaque -1.15 (95% CI: -2.02,-0.29) and SMD for gingivitis -0.51 (95% CI: -0.76, -0.25). These represented a 7% reduction on the Quigley Hein Plaque Index and a 17% reduction on the Ainamo Bay Bleeding on Probing Gingival Index. The heterogeneity found in these meta-analyses for short term trials was caused by one trial that had exceptionally low standard deviations. Sensitivity analyses revealed the results to be robust when selecting trials of high quality. There was no evidence of any publication bias. No other powered brush designs were consistently superior to manual toothbrushes. In these trials, data on cost, reliability and side effects were inconsistently reported. Those side effects that were reported on in the trials were localised and temporary. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Powered toothbrushes with a rotation oscillation action achieve a modest reduction in plaque and gingivitis compared to manual toothbrushing. Observation of methodological guidelines and greater standardisation of design would benefit both future trials and meta-analyses.

Effect of a 3-year professional flossing program with chlorhexidine gel on approximal caries and cost of treatment in preschool children.

The aim was to evaluate the effect of chlorhexidine gel treatment on the incidence of approximal caries in preschool children. One hundred and seventeen 4-year-olds, divided into two groups, participated: (1) chlorhexidine gel group (n = 59), and (2) placebo gel group (n = 58). Group 1 was treated 4 times a year with a 1% chlorhexdine gel and group 2 with a placebo gel. Approximately 0.7 ml of gel was applied interdentally by means of a flat dental floss. A control group (group 3), which did not receive any flossing or gel treatment, was also included in the study (n = 116). After 3 years, i.e. when the children were 7 years old, the mean incidence of caries on approximal surfaces (defs), including both enamel and dentin lesions, was 2.59 in the chlorhexidine gel, 4.53 in the placebo gel and 4.20 in the control group (group 1 vs. 2 and group 1 vs. 3: p < 0.01). Mean number of approximal fillings at the end of the study, i.e. when the children were 7 years old, was 0.33 in the chlorhexidine gel, 1.04 in the placebo gel and 0.80 in the control group (group 1 vs. 2: p < 0.01; group 1 vs. 3: p < 0.05). The progression of approximal caries lesions, diagnosed on bitewing radiographs from the age of 5 to 7, was slower in the chlorhexidine than in the placebo gel group (the control group was not evaluated in this respect). A cost analysis, based on the total treatment time in minutes, showed a small gain for the flossing program.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)