Studies supporting the efficacy of the Sulcabrush® have been performed by: Columbia University, University at Buffalo and Indiana University.
Comparative Study of Sulcabrush® vs. Floss on PI and GI
Dr. A. Zakarian, Dr. L. M. Steinberg, Dr. F. Odusola and Dr. I. D. Mandel
Columbia University, School of Dental and Oral Surgery, Department of Periodontics, New York, NY, USA.
This
study sought to determine the usefulness of a new interdental brush in
reducing dental plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation. Thirty
adult subjects were followed for three consecutive 30 day periods.
Examinations were conducted at baseline 30, 60 and 90 days and gingival
and plaque indices were scored. In the first thirty day period 15
subjects used the Sulcabrush® once daily and a soft bristle
toothbrush as their routine while the other 15 subjects used unwaxed
dental floss once daily accompanied by routine soft bristle
toothbrushing. At the end of 30 days, all subjects were examined and
were asked to refrain from sulcabrushing and return to their everyday
oral hygiene routine for the next 30 days. On day 60, subjects crossed
over - those who had sulcabrushed now flossed once daily while those
who flossed now sulcabrushed once daily for the final 30 day period.
Day 90, all subjects were examined. When the use of Sulcabrush®
is compared to floss, it was found that both led to statistically
significant reductions in plaque index, although one is not more
effective than the other. Both Sulcabrush® and floss led to statistically significant reductions in gingival index.
However, the Sulcabrush®
effect on gingival index was significantly greater than unwaxed
dental floss. This improvement may be due to the ability of the Sulcabrush® to get into areas not accessible to dental floss.
Reprinted from the proceedings of the American Academy of Dental Research
AADR Annual Meeting and Exhibition, March 1992, Boston, Massachusetts
Comparative Efficacy of Sulcular Oral Hygiene Brush (Sulcabrush®) and Dental Floss
M.
L. Mather, B.S., O. Shibly, D.D.S., M.S., R.L. Comeau A.A.S., R.D.H.,
M.A. Bessinger, B.S., and R.E. Cohen, D.D.S., M.S., PHD
SUNY at Buffalo, NY, University at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Department of Periodontics, Buffalo, NY.
The purpose of this split-mouth clinical study was to compare the efficacy of a sulcular oral hygiene brush (Sulcabrush®)
to dental floss with regard to plaque removal and reduction of
gingival inflammation. Patients selected for this study (n=33) were at
least 21 years of age, with at least 10 teeth (3 contiguous) on each
side. The baseline gingival index (GI; modified Silness-Loe) and plaque
index (PI; modified Quigley Hein) were 1.5 or greater. The stain index
(SI) and Eastman Interdental Bleeding Index (BI) also were measured at
Baseline. Written instructions and extensive clinical home care
demonstrations were provided to all subjects for all oral hygiene
procedures. Patients then performed home care twice daily using a soft
toothbrush. This procedure was followed, once daily in the evening, by
use of floss in 1 maxillary and 1 mandibular quadrant, and the use of
the Sulcular brush around the remaining teeth.
Compliance
was assessed by patient diaries. GI, PI, BI and SI were measured on
both the sulcular brush and dental floss sides. In addition,
anterior/posterior and interproximal/facial-lingual measurements were
analyzed by analysis of variance and paired t-tests. We found that the
sulcular brush was significantly more effective in reducing plaque in
molar sites than dental floss (P<.05). In addition, the sulcular
brush was as effective as dental floss in reducing plaque (P<.003),
gingival bleeding (P<.0001), and gingival inflammation (P<.004)
in all other areas examined. Collectively, these data suggest that the
sulcular brush may be a useful addition to patients™ home care
regimen. This study was supported in part by a grant from Sulcabrush®Inc.
Presented at the American Academy of Periodontology, Research Forum, November 1992
A Clinical Evaluation of the Sulcabrush®
E. B. Hancock, DDS, MSD, C. M. Brown, DDS, MSD, and T. J. Wolfe, DDS, MSD.
Indiana University, School of Dentistry, Department of Periodontics, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
The
purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a unituft
brush in combination with a conventional brush for plaque removal and
maintenance of gingival health. Thirty patients presenting for routine
dental care were examined and scored for plaque deposits and gingival
inflammation. All subjects received a dental prophylaxis consisting of
removal of all supragingival and subgingival deposits and polishing of
the clinical crowns. Subjects were subsequently evaluated at 1 week, 6
weeks, and 12 weeks. The addition of a unituft brush to the patients'
regimen of oral hygiene procedures resulted in significant reductions
at 12 weeks in both plaque_scores (P<.05) and gingival inflammation
(P<.01) when compared to the use of the conventional brush alone.
Reprinted from Clinical Preventive Dentistry, January 1991
|
