Trial reportBMC oral health2026
The effects of using water flosser versus interdental brush on gingival health in patients with mandibular bonded retainer - a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07054203 (The Effects of Using Water Flosser Versus Interdental Brush on Gingival Health in Patients With Mandibular Bonded Retainer - A Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this 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.
The Effects of Using Water Flosser Versus Interdental Brush on Gingival Health in Patients With Mandibular Bonded Retainer - A Randomized Controlled Trial
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimEffective interdental cleaning is essential for maintaining periodontal health in patients with fixed orthodontic retainers. This study compared the efficacy of a water flosser and an interdental brush in improving periodontal health over six months.
methodsSeventy participants were randomized into water flosser (n = 35) and interdental brush (n = 35) groups. Periodontal indices including plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), bleeding index (BI), calculus index (CI), clinical attachment level (CAL), probing depth (PD), and marginal recession (MR) were assessed at baseline (T0), three months (T1), and six months (T2). Mann-Whitney U tests compared groups at each time point. Repeated measures ANOVA evaluated time, group, and interaction effects. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) determined the influence of demographic and clinical variables on outcomes.
resultsAt baseline, no significant differences were found between groups (p > 0.05). By T1 and T2, the water flosser group showed significantly lower PI, GI, CI (p < 0.001). Significant time × group interactions favored the water flosser for these parameters, while CAL and PD showed no significant between-group differences. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) revealed superior soft-tissue outcomes with water flossers and identified male gender and thin gingival biotype as predictors of poorer periodontal outcomes.
conclusionWater flossers offer superior improvement in soft-tissue periodontal indices compared to interdental brushes in fixed retainer patients. Age did not influence periodontal outcomes, while male gender was associated with higher plaque and gingival inflammation scores.
trial registrationClinicalTrial.Gov; Registration number: NCT07054203; June 25, 2025.
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.