体外比较圆柱型牙间刷与牙间橡胶剔器的清洁效果和力。

In vitro comparison of cleaning efficacy and force of cylindric interdental brush versus an interdental rubber pick.

机构信息

Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.

Institute of Mechatronics, Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, Kiel University of Applied Sciences, Kiel, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Oral Health. 2021 Apr 14;21(1):194. doi: 10.1186/s12903-021-01558-4.

DOI:10.1186/s12903-021-01558-4

PMID:33853594

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8048228/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Interdental brushes (IDB) are according to the actual evidence the first choice for cleaning interdental areas (IDR). Their size should be chosen individually according to the IDR morphology. However, interdental rubber picks (IRP) are appreciated better by the patients and are hence becoming more and more popular but the evidence regarding their efficacy is still limited. The aim of this in vitro study was to measure the experimental cleaning efficacy (ECE) and force (ECF) during the use of interdental brushes versus newer wireless types with rubber filaments (IRP), both fitted and non-fitted for different IDR.

METHODS

The medium size of a conical IRP (regular, ISO 2) with elastomeric fingers versus four sizes (ISO 1, 2, 3, 4) of cylindric IDB with nylon filaments (all Sunstar Suisse SA, Etoy, Switzerland) were tested. Interdental tooth surfaces were reproduced by a 3D-printer (Form 2, Formlabs Sommerville, MA, USA) according to human teeth and matched to morphologically equivalent pairs (isosceles triangle, concave, convex) fitting to three different gap sizes (1.0 mm, 1.1 mm, 1.3 mm). The pre-/post brushing situations at IDR (standardized, computer aided ten cycles) were photographically recorded and quantified by digital image subtraction to calculate ECE [%]. ECF were registered with a load cell [N].

RESULTS

Overall, a higher ECE was recorded for IDB compared to IRP (58.3 ± 14.9% versus 18.4 ± 10.1%; p < 0.001). ECE significantly depended on the fitting of the IDB. ECE was significant higher in isosceles triangle compared to concave and convex IDR for both IDB and IRP (p ≤ 0.001). ECF was lower for IDB (0.6 ± 0.4N) compared to IRP (0.8 ± 0.5N; p ≤ 0.001). ECE in relation to ECF increases with smaller IDB. For IRP highest values of ECF were found in the smallest IDR.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of an in vitro study, size fitted IDB cleaned more effectively at lower forces compared to conical IRP.

摘要

背景

根据实际证据，牙间刷（IDB）是清洁牙间隙（IDR）的首选。它们的尺寸应根据 IDR 形态个体选择。然而，牙间橡胶剔牙器（IRP）更受患者欢迎，因此越来越受欢迎，但关于其疗效的证据仍然有限。本体外研究的目的是测量使用牙间刷与新型无线带橡胶丝的（IRP）之间的实验清洁效果（ECE）和力（ECF），两者均适合和不适合不同的 IDR。

方法

测试了锥形 IRP（常规，ISO 2）的中号与四个尺寸（ISO 1、2、3、4）的带尼龙丝的圆柱形 IDB（均来自瑞士 Etoy 的 Sunstar Suisse SA）。根据人牙，通过 3D 打印机（Form 2，Formlabs，马萨诸塞州萨默维尔）复制牙间牙面，并与形态等效的对（等腰三角形、凹面、凸面）匹配，适合三个不同的间隙尺寸（1.0mm、1.1mm、1.3mm）。在 IDR（标准化，计算机辅助十次循环）中进行预/后刷牙情况的拍照记录，并通过数字图像相减量化以计算 ECE [%]。使用测力传感器记录 ECF [N]。

结果

总体而言，与 IRP 相比，IDB 的 ECE 更高（58.3±14.9%对 18.4±10.1%；p<0.001）。ECE 显著取决于 IDB 的适配性。在 IDB 和 IRP 中，等腰三角形的 ECE 均显著高于凹面和凸面（p≤0.001）。IDB 的 ECF 较低（0.6±0.4N），而 IRP 的 ECF 较高（0.8±0.5N；p≤0.001）。ECE 与 ECF 的关系随着 IDB 的减小而增加。对于 IRP，最小的 IDR 中发现 ECF 的值最高。