Caton J G, Blieden T M, Lowenguth R A, Frantz B J, Wagener C J, Doblin J M, Stein S H, Proskin H M
Department of Periodontology, Eastman Dental Center, Rochester, NY 14620.
J Clin Periodontol. 1993 Mar;20(3):172-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1993.tb00340.x.
This study compared the efficacy of an antimicrobial mouthrinse (0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate) plus toothbrushing (mouthrinse group), mechanical interdental cleaning plus toothbrushing (mechanical group), and toothbrushing alone (control group), at reducing and preventing interdental gingival inflammation. 92 male subjects were examined for interdental inflammation using the Eastman interdental bleeding index at baseline, then monthly for 3 months after using one of the above oral hygiene regimens. The mechanical cleaning group had significant reductions in bleeding sites compared to baseline at 1 month (56.90% versus 13.17%) that persisted throughout the study (2 months = 6.65%, 3 months = 5.70%). The other regimens showed no significant bleeding reduction at any time point in the study. The mechanical interdental cleaning group showed improvement over baseline at 1 month with the full benefit apparent after 2 months. The effect of location in the mouth on bleeding reduction was also assessed. The % of posterior sites which bled was always higher than anterior sites. Analysis of maxillary versus mandibular, and buccal versus lingual sites showed no significant differences. Additional observations of the data demonstrated that sites which bled at baseline were more likely to stop bleeding in the mechanical cleaning group. Also, sites which did not bleed at baseline were unlikely to bleed subsequently when mechanical cleaning was used. Neither of these observations were true for the other cleaning regimens. These data show that only mechanical interdental plaque removal combined with toothbrushing is effective at reducing or preventing interdental inflammation. This underscores the importance of instituting mechanical interdental cleaning to eliminate interdental inflammation.
本研究比较了抗菌漱口水（0.12%葡萄糖酸氯己定）加刷牙（漱口水组）、机械性牙间隙清洁加刷牙（机械组）以及单纯刷牙（对照组）在减轻和预防牙间隙牙龈炎症方面的效果。92名男性受试者在基线时使用伊士曼牙间隙出血指数检查牙间隙炎症，然后在采用上述其中一种口腔卫生方案后的3个月内每月检查一次。与基线相比，机械清洁组在1个月时出血部位显著减少（56.90%对13.17%），且在整个研究期间持续减少（2个月 = 6.65%，3个月 = 5.70%）。其他方案在研究的任何时间点均未显示出血有显著减少。机械性牙间隙清洁组在1个月时较基线有所改善，2个月后效果完全显现。还评估了口腔部位对出血减少的影响。出血的后部部位百分比始终高于前部部位。对上颌与下颌以及颊侧与舌侧部位的分析未显示显著差异。对数据的进一步观察表明，在机械清洁组中，基线时出血的部位更有可能停止出血。而且，基线时未出血的部位在采用机械清洁后随后出血的可能性不大。对于其他清洁方案，这两种观察结果均不成立。这些数据表明，只有机械性清除牙间隙菌斑并结合刷牙才能有效减轻或预防牙间隙炎症。这凸显了进行机械性牙间隙清洁以消除牙间隙炎症的重要性。
