Berchier C E, Slot D E, Haps S, Van der Weijden G A
School of Dental Hygiene, INHOLLAND University for Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Int J Dent Hyg. 2008 Nov;6(4):265-79. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-5037.2008.00336.x.
The aim of this study was to assess systematically the adjunctive effect of both flossing and toothbrushing versus toothbrushing alone on plaque and gingivitis.
The MEDLINE and Cochrane Central register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched through December 2007 to identify appropriate studies. The variables of plaque and gingivitis were selected as outcomes.
Independent screening of titles and abstracts of 1166 MEDLINE-Pubmed and 187 Cochrane papers resulted in 11 publications that met the eligibility criteria. Mean values and SD were collected by data extraction. Descriptive comparisons are presented for brushing alone or brushing and flossing. A greater part of the studies did not show a benefit for floss on plaque and clinical parameters of gingivitis. A meta-analysis was performed for the plaque index and gingival index.
The dental professional should determine, on an individual patient basis, whether high-quality flossing is an achievable goal. In light of the results of this comprehensive literature search and critical analysis, it is concluded that a routine instruction to use floss is not supported by scientific evidence.
本研究旨在系统评估使用牙线和刷牙与仅刷牙相比，对牙菌斑和牙龈炎的辅助效果。
检索MEDLINE和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库（CENTRAL）数据库至2007年12月，以确定合适的研究。选择牙菌斑和牙龈炎变量作为结果。
对1166篇MEDLINE-Pubmed文章标题和摘要以及187篇Cochrane文章进行独立筛选，得到11篇符合纳入标准的出版物。通过数据提取收集均值和标准差。对仅刷牙或刷牙加用牙线进行描述性比较。大部分研究未显示使用牙线对牙菌斑和牙龈炎临床参数有益处。对菌斑指数和牙龈指数进行了荟萃分析。
牙科专业人员应根据个体患者情况确定高质量使用牙线是否可行。根据这项全面文献检索和批判性分析的结果，得出结论：常规使用牙线的指导缺乏科学证据支持。
