- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Klinisk forsøg NCT03471325
A Comparison of the Outcomes of Two Existing Routine Clinical Therapies for Dental Prophylaxis
Background: In most practices, conventional in-office prophylaxis starts immediately with scaling and polishing. Therefore, this project was designed to challenge tradition by comparing plaque removal efficacy of rubber cup and air polishing in two scenarios, one where plaque was disclosed prior to treatment and the other where plaque was not disclosed.
Methods: In this randomized, single blind, split-mouth design clinical trial, healthy, non-smoking participants with poor oral hygiene were recruited. Quadrants in each participant were randomly assigned to 4 treatment groups, which were plaque disclosure with rubber cup polishing, no plaque disclosure with rubber cup polishing, plaque disclosure with air polishing, and no plaque disclosure with air polishing. Examiners were calibrated and masked to the treatment rendered in each quadrant. Post treatment satisfaction questionnaires for both participants and operators were completed. Plaque scores for each quadrant and treatment time were the recorded outcome measures.
Studieoversigt
Status
Betingelser
Detaljeret beskrivelse
According to the literature search, there was no preceding study, which compared the efficacy of conventional routine of rubber cup or air powder polishing with or without prior plaque disclosure. Therefore, this study was designed to test the hypotheses that (1) disclosing plaque prior to dental polishing was more effective than dental polishing alone, (2) air polishing was more efficient than rubber cup polishing, and (3) operators and patients prefer air polishing to rubber cup polishing.
In order to evaluate the hypotheses raised, a single blind, randomised controlled clinical trial with a split mouth design was conducted. The control groups had conventional dental prophylaxis regime of mechanical plaque removal with either fine air powder polishing or rubber cup polishing using fine grit prophylaxis paste. The test groups had plaque disclosure prior to mechanical plaque removal as described for the control groups. In total, there were 4 study groups: (1) rubber cup polishing without prior plaque disclosure (RC-NPD) (negative control), (2) rubber cup polishing with prior plaque disclosure (RC-PD) (positive control), (3) air polishing without prior plaque disclosure (AF-NPD) (negative test), and (4) air polishing with prior plaque disclosure (AF-PD) (positive test).
The quadrant that was assigned to receive RC-NPD was treated first followed by the quadrant assigned to receive AF-NPD. Plaque was disclosed in all 4 quadrants and the assigned calibrated examiner proceeded to chart the FMPS. Next, the quadrant assigned to receive RC-PD was treated, followed by the quadrant assigned to receive AF-PD; subsequently FMPS was charted. Any aberrant findings in occlusion, tooth alignment, extra/missing teeth were also noted. A digital stopwatch was used to time the treatment duration for each quadrant. Both participant and clinician completed a post prophylaxis satisfaction questionnaire. The treatment workflow used in this study was illustrated in figure 1. The primary outcome measure was the post treatment FMPS and the secondary outcomes measures were the treatment duration.
Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviations) was used to summarize the plaque score and treatment duration for each study group. Two-way repeated measure ANOVA test was employed to examine the study hypotheses that air polishing was more effective in removing plaque compared to rubber cup polishing and disclosing plaque prior to prophylaxis increased the thoroughness of the prophylaxis. Two-way repeated measure ANOVA test was also performed to study the treatment duration between the 2 polishing methods and treatment regimens of with or without plaque disclosure prior to prophylaxis. In a secondary analysis, interactions were tested to study if there were differences among the 4 operators. Paired T-test and Pearson's Chi-Square tests were used to study the participant's and operator's preference for each treatment modality based on various yardsticks and overall, respectively. The level of significance was set at p-value<0.05. All statistical analyses were carried out using a statistical package.
Undersøgelsestype
Tilmelding (Faktiske)
Fase
- Ikke anvendelig
Deltagelseskriterier
Berettigelseskriterier
Aldre berettiget til at studere
Tager imod sunde frivillige
Køn, der er berettiget til at studere
Beskrivelse
Inclusion Criteria:
- 1) Age 21 to 35 years old
- 2) Healthy
- 3) Non-smoker
- 4) With gingivitis and poor oral hygiene (plaque score of at least 50%)
- 5) English literate
Exclusion Criteria:
- 1) Smoker
- 2) Pregnant or lactating females
- 3) Unable to speak/read/write/communicate in English
- 4) With dentures or bridges or braces
Studieplan
Hvordan er undersøgelsen tilrettelagt?
Design detaljer
- Primært formål: Behandling
- Tildeling: Randomiseret
- Interventionel model: Crossover opgave
- Maskning: Dobbelt
Våben og indgreb
Deltagergruppe / Arm |
Intervention / Behandling |
|---|---|
|
Eksperimentel: Plaque Disclosed with Air Flow (PDAF)
Plaque will be disclosed prior to polishing with the air flow system.
|
air polishing with prior plaque disclosing
Andre navne:
|
|
Eksperimentel: Plaque Disclosed with Rubber Cup (PD-RC)
Plaque will be disclosed prior to polishing with the rubber cup and fine grit prophylaxis paste.
|
rubber cup polishing with prior plaque disclosing
Andre navne:
|
|
Eksperimentel: Non Plaque Disclosed Air Flow (NPD-AF)
Air polishing system will be used to remove the plaque
|
air polishing with no prior plaque disclosing
Andre navne:
|
|
Placebo komparator: Non Plaque Disclosed Rubber Cup (NPD-RC)
Rubber Cup polishing to remove plaque.
|
rubber cup polishing with no prior plaque disclosing
Andre navne:
|
Hvad måler undersøgelsen?
Primære resultatmål
Resultatmål |
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse |
Tidsramme |
|---|---|---|
|
post treatment plaque score
Tidsramme: 1 day
|
plaque score based on Loe and Silness 1963. Minimum score is 0. Maximum score is 1. It is a categorical scale of 0 or 1 and is not a continuous scale. 0 is a good outcome and 1 is a poor outcome. Each side of the tooth will be recorded as either a 0 or a 1. It will be added up and averaged out by the number of tooth sides multiple by 100% to get a percentage total score. The higher the percentage, the worser the outcome. |
1 day
|
Sekundære resultatmål
Resultatmål |
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse |
Tidsramme |
|---|---|---|
|
Treatment duration
Tidsramme: 1 day
|
Time taken to complete the polishing by the air flow system or rubber cup polishing
|
1 day
|
Samarbejdspartnere og efterforskere
Efterforskere
- Ledende efterforsker: Jia Hui Fu, National University Health System, Singapore
Datoer for undersøgelser
Studer store datoer
Studiestart (Faktiske)
Primær færdiggørelse (Faktiske)
Studieafslutning (Faktiske)
Datoer for studieregistrering
Først indsendt
Først indsendt, der opfyldte QC-kriterier
Først opslået (Faktiske)
Opdateringer af undersøgelsesjournaler
Sidste opdatering sendt (Faktiske)
Sidste opdatering indsendt, der opfyldte kvalitetskontrolkriterier
Sidst verificeret
Mere information
Begreber relateret til denne undersøgelse
Nøgleord
Yderligere relevante MeSH-vilkår
- Infektioner
- Stomatognatiske sygdomme
- Periodontale sygdomme
- Mundsygdomme
- Gingival sygdomme
- Gingivitis
- Lægemidlers fysiologiske virkninger
- Adrenerge midler
- Neurotransmittermidler
- Molekylære mekanismer for farmakologisk virkning
- Autonome agenter
- Agenter fra det perifere nervesystem
- Neurotransmitter optagelseshæmmere
- Membrantransportmodulatorer
- Dopaminmidler
- Dopaminoptagelseshæmmere
- Centralnervesystemets stimulanser
- Sympatomimetika
- Adrenerge optagelseshæmmere
- Metamfetamin
Andre undersøgelses-id-numre
- 2016/00916
Plan for individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)
Planlægger du at dele individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)?
Lægemiddel- og udstyrsoplysninger, undersøgelsesdokumenter
Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret lægemiddelprodukt
Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret enhedsprodukt
Disse oplysninger blev hentet direkte fra webstedet clinicaltrials.gov uden ændringer. Hvis du har nogen anmodninger om at ændre, fjerne eller opdatere dine undersøgelsesoplysninger, bedes du kontakte register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en ændring er implementeret på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også blive opdateret automatisk på vores hjemmeside .