Wolffe G N
J Clin Periodontol. 1976 Aug;3(3):148-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1976.tb01862.x.
The effectiveness of the Interspace brush, Inter-Dens, and waxed dental floss as proximal surface cleansing agents was compared in 35 subjects. Each subject used all three methods of cleansing in random order of selection. Statistical analysis of the results showed that there was no difference in the effectiveness of any one of these three agents. However, proximal surfaces of anterior teeth where cleaned more effectively than posterior teeth. The coronal half of the proximal surfaces was cleaned more effectively than the apical half and the facial half more effectively than the lingual half when Inter-Dens was used. Comparison of cleansing effectiveness between facial and lingual halves of proximal surfaces for the Interspace brush and waxed dental floss showed no significant difference. Mesial and distal proximal surfaces were cleaned with similar effectiveness. Plaque control was only satisfactory on approximately half of the proximal surfaces, though a wide variation occurred. Significantly lower plaque scores were found 1 week after the initial instruction session, irrespective of the agent used. The majority of subjects preferred Inter-Dens whilst waxed dental floss was the least-liked method of cleansing.
在35名受试者中比较了Interspace刷、Inter-Dens和含蜡牙线作为邻面清洁工具的有效性。每位受试者以随机选择的顺序使用这三种清洁方法。结果的统计分析表明,这三种工具中任何一种的有效性都没有差异。然而,前牙的邻面比后牙清洁得更有效。使用Inter-Dens时,邻面的冠方一半比根方一半清洁得更有效,颊面比舌面更有效。Interspace刷和含蜡牙线在邻面颊舌两半之间的清洁效果比较无显著差异。近中面和远中面的清洁效果相似。尽管存在很大差异,但菌斑控制仅在大约一半的邻面令人满意。在初次指导课程1周后,无论使用何种工具,菌斑评分均显著降低。大多数受试者更喜欢Inter-Dens,而含蜡牙线是最不受欢迎的清洁方法。