2021International Journal of Dental HygieneRequires access

Comparative evaluation of efficacy and patient‐reported outcome measures of oral hygiene instruction methods for calibrated interdental brush

Ashwin Parakkaje Subramanya, M. L. V. Prabhuji

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and patient-reported outcome measures of oral hygiene instruction methods for calibrated interdental brush. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 participants, with 30 each in control and test group, participated in the study. Clinical examination included gingival index, full mouth bleeding scores and approximal plaque index. Supragingival scaling was performed. Interdental access probe was used to assess the size of interdental brush and corresponding interdental brush were given to the participants. For the control group, oral hygiene instructions were given through demonstration with model and video. For the test group, oral hygiene instructions were given through 'Touch-to-Teach' method. At 4-week follow-up, oral hygiene instructions were repeated to respective groups. After 3 months, clinical examination was done and exit survey on patient-reported outcome measures was administered. Statistical analysis was done. RESULTS: Intergroup comparison of gingival index, full mouth bleeding index and approximal plaque index showed statistically significant difference between test and control group. 'Touch-to-Teach' method of oral hygiene instruction was found to be 'Good'. Acceptance of interdental brush was regarded to be 'Good'. CONCLUSION: Within limitations of the study, Touch-to-Teach method of oral hygiene instruction method was found to be effective and more acceptable and participants used the interdental brush regularly.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and patient-reported outcome measures of oral hygiene instruction methods for calibrated interdental brush. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 participants, with 30 each in control and test group, participated in the study. Clinical examination included gingival index, full mouth bleeding scores and approximal plaque index. Supragingival scaling was performed. Interdental access probe was used to assess the size of interdental brush and corresponding interdental brush were given to the participants. For the control group, oral hygiene instructions were given through demonstration with model and video. For the test group, oral hygiene instructions were given through 'Touch-to-Teach' method. At 4-week follow-up, oral hygiene instructions were repeated to respective groups. After 3 months, clinical examination was done and exit survey on patient-reported outcome measures was administered. Statistical analysis was done. RESULTS: Intergroup comparison of gingival index, full mouth bleeding index and approximal plaque index showed statistically significant difference between test and control group. 'Touch-to-Teach' method of oral hygiene instruction was found to be 'Good'. Acceptance of interdental brush was regarded to be 'Good'. CONCLUSION: Within limitations of the study, Touch-to-Teach method of oral hygiene instruction method was found to be effective and more acceptable and participants used the interdental brush regularly.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and patient-reported outcome measures of oral hygiene instruction methods for calibrated interdental brush. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 participants, with 30 each in control and test group, participated in the study. Clinical examination included gingival index, full mouth bleeding scores and approximal plaque index. Supragingival scaling was performed. Interdental access probe was used to assess the size of interdental brush and corresponding interdental brush were given to the participants. For the control group, oral hygiene instructions were given through demonstration with model and video. For the test group, oral hygiene instructions were given through 'Touch-to-Teach' method. At 4-week follow-up, oral hygiene instructions were repeated to respective groups. After 3 months, clinical examination was done and exit survey on patient-reported outcome measures was administered. Statistical analysis was done. RESULTS: Intergroup comparison of gingival index, full mouth bleeding index and approximal plaque index showed statistically significant difference between test and control group. 'Touch-to-Teach' method of oral hygiene instruction was found to be 'Good'. Acceptance of interdental brush was regarded to be 'Good'. CONCLUSION: Within limitations of the study, Touch-to-Teach method of oral hygiene instruction method was found to be effective and more acceptable and participants used the interdental brush regularly.

Key concepts: Interdental consonant, Medicine, Oral hygiene, Dentistry, Brush, Dental floss, Tooth brushing, Dental Prophylaxis

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative evaluation of efficacy and patient‐reported outcome measures of oral hygiene instruction methods for calibrated interdental brush — Research Paper | ScholarLens