Effect of Professional Prophylaxis on Clinical Parameters and Patient Comfort: Randomized Slipt-Mouth Clinical Trial

April 19, 2025 updated by: João Nascimento, University of Lisbon

The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether the Guided Biofilm Therapy (GBT) protocol can improve or maintain oral health and whether it provides more comfort to patients compared to a conventional protocol.

The study involved 25 adult patients aged 18 years or older, healthy, unmedicated, with more than 20 natural teeth, and no periodontitis.

Main Questions it Aims to Answer:

  • Does the GBT protocol improve or maintain oral health compared to a conventional protocol?
  • Is the GBT protocol more comfortable for patients than the conventional protocol? Comparison Group: Researchers compared the conventional protocol (used in quadrants I and III for Group A, and in quadrants II and IV for Group B) to the test GBT protocol (used in the opposite quadrants) to see if the GBT protocol results in improved clinical outcomes and better patient comfort.

Participants Will:

  • Undergo two different protocols for oral prophylaxis (GBT and conventional protocols) on separate quadrants of their mouth.
  • Have their clinical parameters assessed at three time points: baseline (T0), one week (T1), and three weeks (T2) after the intervention.
  • Rate the comfort of the intervention using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) on a Likert scale from 0 to 10 for each quadrant.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Detailed Description

After the initial evaluation of the participants and their inclusion in the study, the participants were randomized in blocks into group A where a conventional protocol was used in quadrants I and III and the test protocol in quadrants II and IV, and group B where a conventional protocol was used in quadrants II and IV and the test protocol in quadrants I and III.

The observations were made at three different times: baseline, one week after the intervention, and three weeks after the intervention. (Figure 1) The clinical assessment of each participant was performed using the the Ainamo & Bay gingival bleeding index (GBI), the O'Leary plaque control record (PCR) and the Silness and Löe plaque index (PI). (26-28) The primary outcome variable of the study was the Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI) with the Plaque Index (PI) as a secondary outcome variable.

Hard and soft deposits were removed according to the protocol assigned in one appointment performed by the principal investigator the day after the first data collection. The control protocol consisted of mechanical scaling with Woodpecker® scaler (Guilin, Guangxi, 541004 P.R.China) at power 1, followed by stain removal and polishing with R&S RUBBER DOME (R&S® Dental products 25, Rue Bleue - 75009 Paris) with Prophy Paste CCS® polishing paste RDA 250 (Directa AB P.O. Box 723, SE-194 27 Upplands Väsby, Sweden) at a speed of 10,000 rotations per minute.

The test protocol consisted in an assessment of the periodontal status following the application of the plaque discloser (Biofilm Discloser, Dr. Wittmann GmbH & Co KG 64673 Zwingenberg - Germany), followed by oral hygiene instructions and biofilm removal with an erythritol jet (Airflow Plus Powder®, Electro Medical Systems S.A.), Chemin de la Vuarpillière, 31, 1260 Nyon - Switzerland) with the Airflow Prophylaxis Master® device (Electro Medical Systems S.A., Chemin de la Vuarpillière, 31, 1260 Nyon - Switzerland). The jet stream was used at a power of 3 and the irrigation at a power of 10. Calculus removal was then performed with the piezon scaller of the same device using a PS scaler tip (Electro Medical Systems® S.A., Chemin de la Vuarpillière, 31, 1260 Nyon - Switzerland).

The first follow-up assessment (T1) was performed one week after the intervention, and the second follow-up assessment (T2) was performed 3 weeks after the intervention performed by the same research assistant that performed the initial assessment (T0). indecesThe precision and accuracy of the data collection was ensured by calibrating the instruments used and the investigators to minimize and control possible measurement errors. The assistant investigator underwent calibration before the start of the study to train the indeces, followed by a discussion of the criteria with the principal investigator.

After the appointment the participant rated comfort using a Visual Analog Scale measured on a Likert scale of 0 to 10 for each quadrant.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

25

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Lisbon, Portugal
        • University Lisbon

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • healthy, unmedicated, without periodontitis, and with more than 20 natural teeth

Exclusion Criteria:

  • dental implants, with periodontal pockets equal to or greater than 4, with fixed orthodontic appliances, with special needs, with some medical pathology, taking antibiotics 3 months before the study, smokers, with known hypersensitivity to erythritol and patients who did not complete the follow-up.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Test
GBT Protocol
GBT Protocol
Other Names:
  • GBT Protocol
Use master piezon
Active Comparator: Control
Scalling and polishing
scalling

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
GBI
Time Frame: 4 weeks
Ainamo & Bay gingival bleeding index
4 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
PCR
Time Frame: 4 weeks
O'Leary plaque control record
4 weeks
PI
Time Frame: 4 weeks
Silness and Löe plaque index
4 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

March 17, 2022

Primary Completion (Actual)

April 29, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 30, 2024

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 11, 2025

First Posted (Actual)

April 20, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

April 24, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 19, 2025

Last Verified

April 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Dental Plaque

Clinical Trials on GBT

Subscribe