ArticleOral health & preventive dentistry2020
Mapping the Product Range of Interdental Brushes: Sizes, Shapes, and Forces.
Article in Oral health & preventive dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Plaque cleaning efficacy of waist-shaped interdental brushes among individuals with open interproximal spaces: a systematic review.Evidence-based dentistry · 2024Pooled it
- The Patient-Centred Interdental Cleaning Concept-Consensus Based on a Round Table.International journal of dental hygiene · 2026Article
- The Journey of Oral Hygiene: The Past, the Present, the Future.Journal of periodontal research · 2026Article
- Assessment of Interdental Space and Satisfaction Change in Interdental Toothbrush Size Application and Usage According to Interdental Gap Measurement.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025Article
- The Influence of Interdental Brushes and Toothpaste On Approximal Enamel and Dentine Abrasion - A Laboratory Study.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025Article
- History of Interdental Brushes: Origins, Developments, Perspectives.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025Article
- Creation of a Systematic Interdental Brush Set Based on the Passage Hole Diameter (PHD) - An In-Vitro Study.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2024Article
- New design of interdental rubber picks - does the archimedean screw design bring an improvement for experimental cleaning efficacy and force?BMC oral health · 2024Article
- New Methods for Replacing Single Missing Teeth with Non-prep Bridges (NPBs) - A Case Series.The journal of adhesive dentistry · 2023Article
- New Options for Subgingival Oral Hygiene with a Flattened Interdental Brush Design - In Vitro Examination and Case Report.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2023Article
- The influence of artificial saliva on the cleaning force of interdental rubber picks: an in-vitro comparison.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- [Frugal dentistry-saving resources with a focus on core functions and patient needs].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021Review
- In vitro comparison of cleaning efficacy and force of cylindric interdental brush versus an interdental rubber pick.BMC oral health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePreventive dentistry aims to improve oral hygiene, including the use of interdental cleansing aids. Clear and simple classifications may positively impact patient communication and motivate oral health behaviour. To date, there is no comparative analysis of interdental brush classifications and sizes. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 2320 interdental brush samples by 24 manufacturers was examined regarding their passage hole diameter (PHD) according to the ISO standard for interdental brushes (ISO16409:2016), and their current classifications were evaluated. Inter- and intrarater reliability of the ISO size classification were determined based on 20 raters and 10 interdental brushes. The insertion force for these interdental brushes was analysed in vitro.
resultsExcellent intra- and interrater reliability was achieved (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ≥ 0.973) overall, although greater variance was observed for bigger brush sizes. Insertion forces varied depending on size and form of the brushes, amounting to 1.58 N (SD = 1.27 N) for cylindric and tapered brushes, and to 2.31 N (SD = 0.81 N) for waist-shaped brushes. The size range of commercially available products was 0.6-5.2 mm PHD, 90% presenting with a PHD ≤ 2.0 mm. Size intervals were unsystematic. The ISO size was indicated by 33% of all manufacturers, the exact PHD by 25%.
conclusionsThe determination of the PHD is a reproducible instrument for most brushes currently on the market. In vitro, forces developed based on this classification are mostly moderate, thus unlikely to cause periodontal trauma. Given the discontinuous range and unclear labelling of available products, the development of a simplified classification system by usage of the PHD may benefit the practitioner and patient alike by contributing to improve oral hygiene behaviours.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.