European journal of oral implantology · 2008
The safety and acceptability of an electric toothbrush on peri-implant mucosa in patients with oral implants in aesthetic areas: a prospective cohort study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rasperini Giulio, Pellegrini Gaia, Cortella Antonia, Rocchietta Isabella, Consonni Dario, Simion Massimo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate the safety and the acceptability of an electric toothbrush used on the peri-implant mucosa of implants placed in the aesthetic area.
METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients rehabilitated with implants positioned in the maxillary aesthetic area were recruited. Implants had to be restored at least 6 months prior to baseline. At baseline, subjects were provided with Oral-B Professional Care 7000 and received appropriate instructions to brush twice a day over a 12-month period. Papillary bleeding index, recession and probing depth were measured at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months.
RESULTS: Ninety-eight (98) patients completed the study. There was an overall reduction of recession (mean 0.2 mm) of borderline statistical significance. All of the changes occurred at the first followup visit (P=0.09) and persisted thereafter. The statistical analyses regarding the probing depth found a highly significant decrease over time (mean 0.3 mm). The bleeding score showed a gradual decrease over time, with a reduction at 12 months by more than half (0.65) in comparison with the baseline (1.50) and was shown to be highly significant (Wilcoxon sign-rank test: P < 0.001). No patient showed adverse effects such as ulcerations or desquamation. A high score of satisfaction by the patients using the electric toothbrush was reported (94% would continue to use it).
CONCLUSION: The electric toothbrush Oral B Professional Care 7000 appears to be safe for patients with fixed prosthesis on implants in aesthetic areas. Successive randomised clinical trials are needed to compare this instrument with other therapeutic devices for mechanical plaque control.
METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients rehabilitated with implants positioned in the maxillary aesthetic area were recruited. Implants had to be restored at least 6 months prior to baseline. At baseline, subjects were provided with Oral-B Professional Care 7000 and received appropriate instructions to brush twice a day over a 12-month period. Papillary bleeding index, recession and probing depth were measured at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months.
RESULTS: Ninety-eight (98) patients completed the study. There was an overall reduction of recession (mean 0.2 mm) of borderline statistical significance. All of the changes occurred at the first followup visit (P=0.09) and persisted thereafter. The statistical analyses regarding the probing depth found a highly significant decrease over time (mean 0.3 mm). The bleeding score showed a gradual decrease over time, with a reduction at 12 months by more than half (0.65) in comparison with the baseline (1.50) and was shown to be highly significant (Wilcoxon sign-rank test: P < 0.001). No patient showed adverse effects such as ulcerations or desquamation. A high score of satisfaction by the patients using the electric toothbrush was reported (94% would continue to use it).
CONCLUSION: The electric toothbrush Oral B Professional Care 7000 appears to be safe for patients with fixed prosthesis on implants in aesthetic areas. Successive randomised clinical trials are needed to compare this instrument with other therapeutic devices for mechanical plaque control.