Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Removal of simulated biofilm at different implant crown designs with interproximal oral hygiene aids. An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the removal of simulated biofilm at two different implant-supported restoration designs with various interproximal oral hygiene aids.

METHODS: Mandibular models with a missing first molar were fabricated and provided with single implant analogues (centrally or distally placed) and two different crown designs (CCD: conventional and ACD: alternative crown design). Occlusion spray was applied to the crowns to simulate artificial biofilm. Thirty participants (dentists, dental hygienists and laypersons) were equally divided and asked to clean the interproximal areas with five different cleaning devices to further evaluate if there were differences in their cleaning ability. The outcome was measured via standardized photos and the cleaning ratio, representing the cleaned surfaces in relation to the respective crown surface. Statistical analysis was performed by linear mixed-effects model with fixed effects for cleaning tools, surfaces, crown design and type of participant, and random effects for crowns.

RESULTS: The mean cleaning ratio for the investigated tools and crown designs were (in%): Super floss: 76±13/ACD and 57±14/CCD (highest cleaning efficiency), followed by dental floss: 66±13/ACD and 56±15/CCD, interdental brush: 55±10/ACD and 45±9/CCD, electric interspace brush: 31±10/ACD and 30±1/CCD, microdroplet floss: 8±9/ACD and 9±8/CCD. There was evidence of an overall effect of each factor "cleaning tool", "surface", "crown design" and "participant" (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: ACD allowed more removal of the artificial biofilm than CCD with Super floss, dental floss and interdental brush. Flossing and interproximal brushing were the most effective cleaning methods. A complete removal of the artificial biofilm could not be achieved in any group. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app