Trial reportClinical oral investigations2026
Enhanced efficacy of oral hygiene instructions during motivational interviewing using intraoral scanner technology: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the efficacy of an intra-oral scanner (IOS) as adjunctive tool to perform oral hygiene instructions during motivational interviewing (MI).
methodsA randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) was performed in patients diagnosed with periodontitis Stage I-II, Gade A-B. Full Mouth Plaque Score (FMPS) (primary outcome) and Full Mouth Bleeding Score (FMBS) were recorded ad baseline (T0). Consequently, test group was scanned with an IOS, a digital 3D model created and was used during MI including oral hygiene instructions (OHI), while control patients received MI only. After ≥ 66 days (mean: 72 days) (T1), FMPS and FMBS as well as patients’ level of adherence and concordance by means of dedicated questionnaires were assessed and compared to T0.
resultsA total of 80 patients (mean age 58.2 ± 15.2; 47 female; 62 non-smokers; 18 light smokers) were randomized and available for analysis. Mean FMPS change was 16.65 ± 22.95 for the test group and 6.98 ± 19.41 for the control group (p = 0.045), while FMBS change was 6.77 ± 7.30 for the test group and was 4.64 ± 12.87 for the control group (p = 0.366). Time for MI was 24.02 ± 1.60 min (Test group) and 22.52 ± 1.79 (Control group) (p < 0.001). Patients’ adherence, recorded as interdental care, showed a statistically significant difference in favor of the test group (test group: “yes”=37 (92.5%); “no”=3 (7.5%); control group: “yes”=23 (57.5%); “no”=17 (42.5%) (p < 0.001)).
conclusionWithin the limits of this RCT, the implementation of IOS to generate digital three-dimensional models of patients’ dentition demonstrated potential for improving the effectiveness of OHI during a single-session MI in terms of FMPS reduction. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The incorporation of intraoral scanning technology may represent a beneficial visual adjunct that strengthens patient-clinician communication and could contribute to enhanced self-performed oral hygiene, improved plaque control, and increase patient adherence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42020615What 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.