Mancinelli-Lyle Deborah, Van der Weijden Fridus G A, Slot Dagmar E
Department of Periodontology Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), A Joint Venture between the Faculty of Dentistry of the University of Amsterdam and the Faculty of Dentistry of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, LA Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Int J Dent Hyg. 2025 Feb;23(1):176-185. doi: 10.1111/idh.12817. Epub 2024 Jul 12.
To determine the efficacy of a water flosser (WF) compared to an interdental brush (IDB) in reducing gingival inflammation. Additionally, the products were compared on the incidence of gingival abrasion.
Young adults with moderate gingivitis and ≥4 accessible interdental spaces by IDB in each quadrant were selected for this study. Participants were randomly assigned a WF or an IDB as an adjunct to manual toothbrushing. Clinical signs of inflammation were measured in two randomly assigned contralateral quadrants by bleeding on pocket probing (BOPP) or bleeding on marginal probing (BOMP). Gingival Abrasion Score (GAS) was assessed per quadrant. Data was recorded at the baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks.
Both groups WF (n = 40) and IDB (n = 38) showed a significant reduction (p = 0.000) in BOMP and BOPP from the baseline to 4 weeks for all sites and the interdental sites only. At 4 weeks the WF group compared to the IDB group showed significantly lower BOPP (p = 0.030) and BOMP scores (p = 0.003) for all sites. For the interdental sites WF showed compared to IDB for BOMP significant (p = 0.019) lower values but not for BOPP (p = 0.219). There were no differences between the groups for GAS at any time point.
In patients with moderate gingivitis, after 4 weeks use the WF is more effective than the IDB in obtaining marginal gingival health.
比较水牙线（WF）与牙间刷（IDB）在减轻牙龈炎症方面的疗效。此外，还比较了这两种产品导致牙龈磨损的发生率。
本研究选取了患有中度牙龈炎且每个象限至少有4个可使用牙间刷清洁的牙间隙的年轻成年人。参与者被随机分配使用水牙线或牙间刷作为手动刷牙的辅助工具。通过探诊龈沟出血（BOPP）或探诊边缘龈出血（BOMP），在两个随机分配的对侧象限中测量炎症的临床体征。每个象限评估牙龈磨损评分（GAS）。在基线、2周和4周记录数据。
水牙线组（n = 40）和牙间刷组（n = 38）在所有部位以及仅牙间隙部位，从基线到4周，BOMP和BOPP均显著降低（p = 0.000）。在4周时，水牙线组与牙间刷组相比，所有部位的BOPP（p = 0.030）和BOMP评分（p = 0.003）显著更低。对于牙间隙部位，与牙间刷相比，水牙线的BOMP值显著更低（p = 0.019），但BOPP值无显著差异（p = 0.219）。在任何时间点，两组的GAS均无差异。
在患有中度牙龈炎的患者中，使用4周后，水牙线在实现边缘龈健康方面比牙间刷更有效。
