Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38553668›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2024

New design of interdental rubber picks - does the archimedean screw design bring an improvement for experimental cleaning efficacy and force?

Ann-Kristin Härdter, Anna Nordloh, Miriam Cyris, Martin Straßburger, Thomas Rinder, Christof E Dörfer, Sonja Sälzer, Christian Graetz

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ann-Kristin Härdter *Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Anna Nordloh *Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Miriam CyrisClinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Martin StraßburgerClinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Thomas RinderInstitute of Mechatronics, Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, Kiel University of Applied Sciences, Kiel, Germany.
Christof E DörferClinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Sonja SälzerClinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Christian GraetzClinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany. graetz@konspar.uni-kiel.de.
Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUp to date, interdental brushes (IDB) are the first choice for interdental cleaning because of their cleaning efficacy. Cylindrical ones must be selected individually according to the size/morphology of the interdental area (IDR), whereas conical ones cover a larger variability of IDR. However, there is a trend on the part of patients towards interdental rubber picks (IRP) which are in general conically shaped, and which seem to be linked with lower cleaning efficacy. A new IRP with an Archimedes´ screw design was developed to overcome this limitation. Therefore, the in vitro study aimed to measure the experimental cleaning efficacy (ECE) and force (ECF) during interdental use of IDBs versus the new IRP type.

methodsThree IRPs with different tapers (PHB angled: 0.039, PHB straight S: 0.027, Vitis straight M: 0.045; all Flexipicks, Dentaid, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain) were compared to one IDB (Interprox micro PHD 0.9, Dentaid, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain). IDR were reproduced by a 3D-printer (Form2, Formlabs Sommerville, MA, USA) according to human teeth and matched to equivalent pairs (isosceles triangle, concave, convex) in three different diameters (1.0 mm,1.1 mm,1.3 mm). Covered with simulated biofilm, pre-/ post-brushing situations of IDR (standardized, computer-aided ten cycles) were photographed and quantified by digital image subtraction to calculate ECE [%]. ECF were registered with a load cell [N]. Statistically significant differences were detected using the Mann-Whitney-U-test and the Kruskal-Wallis-test with Bonferroni correction for multiple testing.

resultsOverall, the ECE (mean ± SD) was higher for IDB micro 0.9 (45.95 ± 11.34%, p < 0.001) compared to all IRPs (PHB angled: 25.37 ± 15.29%; PHB straight: 22.28 ± 16.75%; Vitis straight: 25.24 ± 12.21%; p ≤ 0.001), whereat best ECE was achieved in isosceles triangle IDR of 1.0-1.1 mm (IDB micro 0.9: 70.7 ± 7.7%; PHB angled S: 57.30 ± 4.43%; p < 0.001). The highest ECF occurred for Vitis straight M with 2.11 ± 0.46 N, while IDB micro 0.9 showed lowest ECF values (0.64 ± 0.14 N; p < 0.001).

conclusionsIRP with an Archimedes´ screw design and a higher taper were associated with advanced ECE but also higher ECF, nevertheless, ECE didn't reach the cleaning efficacy of conventional IDBs.

Indexed as

Dental Devices, Home CareDental PlaqueBone ScrewsHumansRubberToothbrushingRubberDentistryInterdental brushesInterdental cleaning efficacyInterdental rubber picksMechanical plaque controlOral hygienePeriodontology

Identifiers

PMID38553668
PMCPMC10981285
OpenAlexW4393344320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.