Cited by 92Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchDental Health and Care UtilizationOral Health Pathology and Treatment

Use of oral irrigators as vehicle for the application of antimicrobial agents in chemical plaque control

Lang, N. P., Räber, K.·1981·Journal of Clinical Periodontology

Abstract

Abstract The purpose of the present investigation was to study the topographical distribution of plaque formation using chlorhexidine digluconate (CH) as a mouthrinse and in oral irrigators during experimental gingivitis. Forty dental students (aged 22–26) with clean teeth and healthy gingivae abolished oral hygiene oral period of 3 weeks (Löe et al. 1965). During this period the participants were randomly assigned to one of five groups, Group A rinsed daily with 30 ml of a placebo and Group B with 30 ml 0.1% chlorhexidine digluconate. In Groups C and E a fractionated jet irrigator was used for the daily application of 600 ml placebo (C) or O.05% CH (E); 600 ml of 0.05% CH was also used in a monojet irrigator (Group D). At the start, after 1, 2 and 3 weeks of no oral hygiene and 1 week following reinstituted oral hygiene, plaque was assessed using the Plaque Index (Silness &. Löe 1964) and gingival health was scored according to the criteria of the Gingival Index (Löe & Silness 1963). The discoloration of the teeth was determined using a set of color photos. During the experiment all groups reached plaque levels that were significantly different from each other. The highest PII were seen in the placebo rinsing group (A) followed by placebo irrigation (C). Plaque was significantly reduced in the CH groups. However, rinsing (B) formed significantly more plaque than using the oral irrigator (D, E). Group E showed the least amount of plaque. In addition, the interproximal PII were equally low as the buccal and lingual. With CH (B, D, E), gingivitis did not develop except for some interproximals in Group B. A fractionated jet irrigator was more effective for the application of CH than rinsing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1981.tb02029.x

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Applying chlorhexidine by an oral irrigator seems to be more effective than water with regard to plaque and gingivitis.

    “Applying chlorhexidine by an oral irrigator seems to be more effective than water with regard to plaque and gingivitis.91,92”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lang, N. P., & Räber, K.
Affiliations
University of Bern (CH)
Corresponding author
Lang, N. P.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1981-06
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
177-188
ISSN
  • 0303-6979 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-051X
OpenAlex
W2112619433
Cited by
89
References
24
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal Of Clinical Periodontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Dental Health and Care Utilization
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral Health Pathology and Treatment
Keywords
oral irrigators, chlorhexidine gluconate, plaque control, experimental gingivitis, mouthwash, plaque distribution, gingival health, tooth discoloration, oral hygiene
MeSH terms
Adult, Chlorhexidine, Dental Devices, Home Care, Dental Plaque, Gingivitis, Humans, Therapeutic Irrigation, Mouthwashes, Periodontal Index, Random Allocation, Time Factors, Tooth Discoloration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review