RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to evaluate the different methods for removing oral biofilm in combination with 0.12% chlorhexidine, in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of the General University Hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Initially, the patients were included in the study and underwent periodontal evaluation by means of the visible plaque index (VPI) and gingival bleeding index (GBI). The removal of visible biofilm, by a professional, was carried out using a toothbrush and dental floss, followed by the application of a 0.12% chlorhexidine solution. The patients were included in this randomized and controlled study into four groups (total n = 48), as follows: Chlorhexidine and gauze 12/12 h; chlorhexidine and gauze 24/24 h; chlorhexidine and brushing 12/12 h; chlorhexidine and brushing 24/24 h. The patients underwent the biofilm removal protocol for 7 days and then were subjected to a new clinical evaluation as to VPI and GBI. Data analysis was performed through stratification and arrangement of the records, in order to carry out the associations with health indicators used in the study, and the statistical tests used were Kappa and t-test for independent and paired samples. RESULTS: A decrease in the VPI and GBI values when comparing baseline to the final evaluation for all groups was observed. CONCLUSION: Based on the methodology, it was possible to concluded that chlorhexidine associated with the mechanical action of the toothbrush or gauze in the times 12 h and 24 h in the ICU environment presented the same results as regards amount of visible biofilm. How to cite the article: Oliveira MS, Borges AH, Mattos FZ, Semenoff TA, Segundo AS, Tonetto MR, Bandeca MC, Porto AN. Evaluation of different methods for removing oral biofilm in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. J Int Oral Health 2014;6(3):61-4.
RESUMO
The aim of this study was to report a clinical case of treatment of Class II division I malocclusion with facial aesthetic impairment, whose therapeutic approach comprised the association of orthodontic treatment with orthognathic surgery. The treatment for the present case consisted of decompensation oflower incisors and extraction oftwo lower premolars, in order to obtain horizontal discrepancy allowing the surgery for mandibular advancement. At the end of treatment, we could clinically observe a Class I molar/canine relationship, normal overbite and overjet, presence of lip seal, type I facial profile with considerable aesthetic improvement. We can conclude that the ortho-surgical treatment is a therapeutic alternative providing the best prognosis in terms of aesthetic correction in patients with unpleasant facial profile.
