Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32110467›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of orthodontics2019

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Different Cleaning Methods for Orthodontic Thermoplastic Retainers in terms of Bacterial Colonization.

Filiz Aydoğan Akgün, Neslihan Ebru Şenışık, Emel Sesli Çetin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of orthodontics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Filiz Aydoğan AkgünDepartment of Orthodontics, Süleyman Demirel University School of Dentistry, Isparta, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1977-3778
Neslihan Ebru ŞenışıkDepartment of Orthodontics, Süleyman Demirel University School of Dentistry, Isparta, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5935-5987
Emel Sesli ÇetinDepartment of Microbiology, Süleyman Demirel University School of Dentistry, Isparta, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5231-3824

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study investigated the antimicrobial efficacy of three different cleaning methods on

methodsIn this prospective, cross-over study, a total of 21 volunteers were included. All VFRs used by the volunteers were cleaned using three different cleaning methods in a sequence. These methods were peroxide-based cleanser tablets (PBCTs) plus brushing, control (only brushing), and vinegar plus brushing, respectively. The obtained salivary, VFR material, and periodontal data were statistically compared by factorial design repeated measures analysis of variance.

resultsThe SM and LB bacteria counts on VFRs after using both PBCTs and vinegar were statistically similar (p>0.05), but bacteria counts were statistically lower than the control method (p<0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between the SM and LB bacteria counts in saliva samples taken before and after the application of the cleaning methods (p>0.05). Similarly, there were no significant differences between periodontal data obtained from plaque and bleeding indices at all study times. The periodontal pocket depth gradually decreased in the successively performed cleaning applications (p<0.05).

conclusionThe application of PBCTs and vinegar to VFRs at sequential time intervals resulted in similar bacteria counts. The higher LB counts and similarly higher SM counts on the VFR samples indicate that mechanical cleaning only (control method) is not adequate to obtain hygiene. Salivary flora was not correlated with bacteria counts of VFRs.

Indexed as

Bacterial colonizationLactobacillusretentionStreptococcus mutansthermoplastic retainers

Identifiers

PMID32110467
PMCPMC7018490

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.