Аннотация

Цель
To investigate the effectiveness of a personalized selection of oral hygiene aids in individuals with localized gingival recession associated with structural and functional alterations of the mucogingival complex in the anterior segment
Материал и методы
The clinical study included 30 volunteers aged 18–35 years with confirmed marginal gingival recession that had developed against the background of structural and functional anomalies of the mucogingival complex in the anterior portion of the dental arch. All participants were randomized into two equal groups (15 subjects each) according to the oral hygiene regimen applied. The main group maintained oral hygiene using a combination of two toothbrush types: the conventional manual Curaprox CS 5460 together with a single-tuft toothbrush Curaprox CS 1006. The comparison group, by contrast, used only the manual Curaprox CS 5460 without additional hygiene devices.
Результаты
Baseline evaluation of the Silness-Löe and Nave-Rustogj hygiene indices revealed identical values in both groups, confirming homogeneity of the participants’ initial dental status. Follow-up examinations conducted at one week and one month after the start of the study demonstrated statistically significant intergroup differences: participants who practiced oral hygiene with the combined use of two toothbrushes achieved significantly better outcomes compared to those using a single brush. Comprehensive analysis of the data suggests that the effectiveness of oral hygiene procedures in individuals with anterior gingival recession is substantially enhanced by adopting a two-component oral hygiene approach
Заключение
The findings of this clinical study suggest that, in patients with anterior gingival recession, optimal oral hygiene status is best achieved through a combined regimen incorporating both the standard manual Curaprox CS 5460 and the single-tuft Curaprox CS 1006. This two-component approach underscores the importance of individualized hygiene protocols and may serve as a practical guideline for improving patient outcomes in clinical practice.

Ключевые слова

individual oral hygiene manual toothbrush gingival recession indicative indexes local recession.

Полный текст

Скачать статью в PDF

Полная версия статьи в формате PDF

Список литературы

  1. 1. Muthri S., Arunkumar S.M., Hegde S. Etiology and occurrence of gingival recession – an epidemiological study. J Indian Sci Periodontol. 2017;19(6):671-675.
  2. 2. Власова Н.Н., Прохоров Н.И., Кузнецов С.В. Клиническая оценка безопасности и эффективности профессиональной гигиены полости рта у пациентов с абфракционными дефектами и рецессией. Гигиена и санитария. 2019;98(3):339-342.
  3. 3. Kassab M.M., Cohen R.E. The etiology and prevalence of gingival recession. JADA. 2018;134:220-225.
  4. 4. Banihashemrad S.A., Fatemi K., Najafi M.H. Effects of smoking on gingival recession. Dent Res J. 2018;5:1-4.
  5. 5. Sarfati A., Boutgeois D., Mora F. Risk assessment for buccal gingival recession defects in an adult population. J Periodontol. 2020;81:1419-1425.
  6. 6. Litonjua L.A., Andreana S., Bush P.J. Toothbrushing and gingival recession. Intern Dent J. 2020;53:67-72.
  7. 7. Tezel A., Canakci V., Cleek Y. Evaluation of gingival recession in left- and right-handed adults. Int J Neuroscience. 2018;110:135-146.
  8. 8. Arweiler N.B., Netuschil L. The oral microbiota. Advanc Exper Med Biol. 2021;90:45-50.
  9. 9. Huang R., Li. M., Gregory R.L. Bacterial interactions in dental biofilm. Virulence. 2019;4:435-444.
  10. 10. De Beer D., Srinivasan R., Stewart P.S. Direct measurement of chlorine penetration into biofilm during disinfection. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;60(12):4339-4344.
  11. 11. Marsh P.D. Contemporary perspective on plaque control. Brit Dent J. 2022;12:601-606.
  12. 12. Marsh P.D. Dental plaque as a biofilm and a microbial community – implication for health and disease. BMC Oral Health. 2016;112:15-19.
  13. 13. Babaahmady K.G., Challacombe S.J., Marsh P.D. Etiological study of streptococcus mutans and lactobacillus spp et sub-sites from approximal dental plaque from children. Caries Res. 2023;32(1):51-58.
  14. 14. Sasahara H., Kawamura M. Behavioral dental science: the relationship between tooth-brushing angle and plaque removal et the lingual surfaces of the posterior teeth in the mandible. J Oral Sci. 2020;42(2):79-82.
  15. 15. Ranzan N., Rosing C.K. Are bristle stiffness and bristle end-shape related to adverse effects on soft tissues during toothbrushing? A systematic review. Intern Dent J. 2018;102:121-124.