EVAULATION OF EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT TOOTHBRUSH TYPES ON PERIODONTAL STATUS IN ORTHODONTIC PATIENTS

Öz

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of soft bristles toothbrushes (SBTB) compared with medium bristles toothbrushes (MBTB) using clinical periodontal parameters in orthodontic patients with self-ligating brackets. Methods: A total of 32 orthodontic patients scheduled for fixed orthodontic treatment were selected for this prospective study. Patients were divided into randomly two groups brushing with tooth brusher type as follow SBTB and MBTB. The bonded bracket plaque index (PI), and pocket depth values (PDV) were evaluated 1 week after bracket placement (T1), 2 weeks after bracket placement (T2); and 3 weeks after bracket placement (T3). The Friedman and Mann Whitney U tests were used to analyze the data. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding PI and PDV values (p > 0.05). In the MBTB group, PDV values revealed statistically significant changes between T2 and T3 (p < 0.05). Moreover, pain scores showed no significant difference between the toothbrush groups (p = 0.540). Conclusion: There were no differences in the periodontal parameters between the soft bristles toothbrushes and oft medium bristles toothbrushes in orthodontic patients with self-ligating brackets. Key words: Self-ligating brackets, Oral hygiene, Periodontal status Farklı Diş Fırçası Tiplerinin Ortodonti Hastalarında Periodontal Duruma Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı yumuşak kıl formasyonuna sahip (SBTB) diş fırçası ile orta sertlikte kıl formasyonuna sahip (MBTB) diş fırçası tiplerinin kapaklı braketler ile tedavi edilen ortodonti hastalarında klinik periodontal parametreleri kaydedilerek plak kaldırma etkinlerinin değerlendirilmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu prospektif çalışma için sabit ortodontik tedavi gören 32 ortodonti hastası seçilmiştir. Hastalar randomize olarak kullandıkları diş fırçası tipine göre SBTB ve MBTB olarak iki gruba ayrılmıştır. Plak indeksi (PI) ve sondalama cep derinliği (PPDV) braketler yerleştirildikten 1 hafta sonra (T1), 2 hafta sonra (T2) ve 3 hafta sonra (T3) olmak üzere değerlendirilmiştir. Friedman ve Mann Whitney U testleri ile Bonferroni düzeltmesi kullanılarak veriler analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: PI ve PPDV yönünden değerlendirildiğinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık gözlenmemiştir (P> 0.05). MBTB grubunda, PDV değerleri T2 ve T3 tedavi zamanları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değişiklik göstermiştir (P <0.05). Ayrıca, ağrı skorları gruplar arasında bir hafta sonunda anlamlı farklılık göstermemiştir (P = 0.540). Sonuç: Yumuşak kıl formasyonuna sahip diş fırçası ile orta sertlikte kıl formasyonuna sahip diş fırçası tiplerinin kapaklı braket kullanılan ortodonti hastalarında periodontal parametreler açısından bir farklılığa sebep olmamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Self-ligating brackets
• Oral hygiene
• Periodontal status

EVAULATION OF EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT TOOTHBRUSH TYPES ON PERIODONTAL STATUS IN ORTHODONTIC PATIENTS

Öz

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of soft bristles toothbrushes (SBTB) compared with medium bristles toothbrushes (MBTB) using clinical periodontal parameters in orthodontic patients with self-ligating brackets. Methods: A total of 32 orthodontic patients scheduled for fixed orthodontic treatment were selected for this prospective study. Patients were divided into randomly two groups brushing with tooth brusher type as follow SBTB and MBTB. The bonded bracket plaque index (PI), and pocket depth values (PDV) were evaluated 1 week after bracket placement (T1), 2 weeks after bracket placement (T2); and 3 weeks after bracket placement (T3). The Friedman and Mann Whitney U tests were used to analyze the data. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding PI and PDV values (p > 0.05). In the MBTB group, PDV values revealed statistically significant changes between T2 and T3 (p < 0.05). Moreover, pain scores showed no significant difference between the toothbrush groups (p = 0.540). Conclusion: There were no differences in the periodontal parameters between the soft bristles toothbrushes and oft medium bristles toothbrushes in orthodontic patients with self-ligating brackets. Key words: Self-ligating brackets, Oral hygiene, Periodontal status Farklı Diş Fırçası Tiplerinin Ortodonti Hastalarında Periodontal Duruma Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı yumuşak kıl formasyonuna sahip (SBTB) diş fırçası ile orta sertlikte kıl formasyonuna sahip (MBTB) diş fırçası tiplerinin kapaklı braketler ile tedavi edilen ortodonti hastalarında klinik periodontal parametreleri kaydedilerek plak kaldırma etkinlerinin değerlendirilmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu prospektif çalışma için sabit ortodontik tedavi gören 32 ortodonti hastası seçilmiştir. Hastalar randomize olarak kullandıkları diş fırçası tipine göre SBTB ve MBTB olarak iki gruba ayrılmıştır. Plak indeksi (PI) ve sondalama cep derinliği (PPDV) braketler yerleştirildikten 1 hafta sonra (T1), 2 hafta sonra (T2) ve 3 hafta sonra (T3) olmak üzere değerlendirilmiştir. Friedman ve Mann Whitney U testleri ile Bonferroni düzeltmesi kullanılarak veriler analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: PI ve PPDV yönünden değerlendirildiğinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık gözlenmemiştir (P> 0.05). MBTB grubunda, PDV değerleri T2 ve T3 tedavi zamanları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değişiklik göstermiştir (P <0.05). Ayrıca, ağrı skorları gruplar arasında bir hafta sonunda anlamlı farklılık göstermemiştir (P = 0.540). Sonuç: Yumuşak kıl formasyonuna sahip diş fırçası ile orta sertlikte kıl formasyonuna sahip diş fırçası tiplerinin kapaklı braket kullanılan ortodonti hastalarında periodontal parametreler açısından bir farklılığa sebep olmamıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Self-ligating brackets
• Oral hygiene
• Periodontal status

Kaynakça

1. 1. Ciancio D, Cunat J, Mather M, Harvey D. A comparison of plaque accumulation in bonded versus banded teeth. J Dent Res 1985;64:325.
2. 2. Türkkahraman H, Sayin M, Bozkurt FY, Yetkin Z, Kaya S, Önal S. Archwire ligation techniques, microbial colonization, and periodontal status in orthodontically treated patients. Angle Orthod 2005;75: 231–6.
3. 3. Feil PH, Grauer JS, Gadbury-Amyot CC, Kula K, McCunniff MD. Intentional use of the Hawthorne effect to improve oral hygiene compliance in orthodontic patients. J Dent Educ 2002;66: 1129–35.
4. 4. Ristic M, Svabic MV, Sasic M, Zelic O. Clinical and microbiological effects of fixed orthodontic appliances on periodontal tissues in adolescents. Orthod Craniofac Res 2007;10: 187–95.
5. 5. Bardal PAP, Olympio KPK, Bastos JRDM, Henriques JFC, Buzalaf MAR. Education and motivation in oral health: preventing disease and promoting health in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Dent Press J Orthod 2011; 16: 95–102.
6. 6. Chang HS, Walsh LJ, Freer TJ. The effect of orthodontic treatment on salivary flow, pH, buffer capacity, and levels of mutans streptococci and lactobacilli. Aust Orthod J 1999;15: 229–34.
7. 7. Zachrisson BU. Cause and prevention of injuries to teeth and supporting structures during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod 1976;69: 285–300.
8. 8. Machen DE. Legal aspects of orthodontic practice: risk management concepts. Periodontal evaluation and updates: don’t abdicate your duty to diagnose and supervise. Am J l Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;98: 84–5.

9. 9. Kloehn JS, Pfeifer JS. The effect of orthodontic treatment on the periodontium. Angle Orthod 1974;44: 127–34.
10. 10. Slot DE, Wiggelinkhuizen L, Rosema NAM, Van der Weijden GA. The efficacy of manual toothbrushes following a brushing exercise: a systematic review. Int J Dent Hygi 2012;10: 187–97.
11. 11. Schmickler J, Wurbs S, Wurbs S, Lange K, Rinke S, Hornecker E, Mausberg RF, Ziebolz D. Influence of the utilization time of different manual toothbrushes on oral hygiene assessed during a 6-month observation period: A randomized clinical trial. J Periodontol 2014;85: 1050–8.
12. 12. Robinson PG, Deacon SA, Deery C, Heanue M, Walmsley AD, Worthington HV, Shaw WC. Manual versus powered toothbrushing for oral health. Cochrane Database System Review 2005;18: CD002281.
13. 13. Vibhute A, Vandana KL. The effectiveness of manual versus powered toothbrushes for plaque removal and gingival health: a meta-analysis. J Ind Soc Periodontol 2012;16: 156–60.
14. 14. Nalçaci R, Özat Y, Çokakoglu S, Türkkahraman H, Önal S, Kaya S. Effect of bracket type on halitosis, periodontal status, and microbial colonization. Angle Orthod 2013;84: 479–85.
15. 15. Pandis N, Papaioannou W, Kontou E, Nakou M, Makou M, Eliades T. Salivary Streptococcus mutans levels in patients with conventional and self-ligating brackets. Eur J Orthod 2010; 32: 94–9.
16. 16. Pellegrini P, Sauerwein R, Finlayson T, McLeod J, Covell DA, Maier T, Machida CA. Plaque retention by self-ligating vs elastomeric orthodontic brackets: quantitative comparison of oral bacteria and detection with adenosine triphosphate-driven bioluminescence. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2009;135: 426–e1-e9..
17. 17. Löe H. The gingival index, the plaque index and the retention index systems. J Periodontol 1967; 38: 610–16.
18. 18. Heasman P, Wilson Z, Macgregor I, Kelly P. Comparative study of electric and manual toothbrushes in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114: 45–9.
19. 19. Da'ameh MDA, Al-Shorman I, Al-Shdeifat N, Fnaish MM. Oral hygiene measures in orthodontic treatment in Northern Jordan. Pakistan Oral Dent J 2011;31: 336–9.
20. 20. Davis SM, Plonka AB, Fulks BA, Taylor KA, Bashutski J. Consequences of orthodontic treatment on periodontal health: clinical and microbiological effects. Semin Orthod s 2014;20: 139–49.
21. 21. Yang X, Su N, Shi Z, Xiang Z, He Y, Han X, Bai D. Effects of self‐ligating brackets on oral hygiene and discomfort: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. Int J Dental Hygiene 2017;15:16-22.
22. 22. Van Der Weijden F, Slot DE. Oral hygiene in the prevention of periodontal diseases: the evidence. Periodontology 2000 2011; 55: 104–23.
23. 23. Erbe C, Klukowska M, Tsaknaki I, Timm H, Grender J, Wehrbein H. Efficacy of 3 toothbrush treatments on plaque removal in orthodontic patients assessed with digital plaque imaging: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2013;143: 760–6.
24. 24. Versteeg PA, Piscaer M, Rosema NAM, Timmerman MF, Van der Velden U, Van der Weijden GA. Tapered toothbrush filaments in relation to gingival abrasion, removal of plaque and treatment of gingivitis. Int J Dental Hygiene 2008;6: 174–82.
25. 25. Zimmer S, Öztürk M, Barthel CR, Bizhang M, Jordan RA. Cleaning efficacy and soft tissue trauma after use of manual toothbrushes with different bristle stiffness. J Periodontol 2011;82: 267–71.
26. 26. Sallum EJ, Nouer DF, Klein MI, Gonçalves RB, Machion L, Sallum AW, Sallum, EA. Clinical and microbiologic changes after removal of orthodontic appliances. Am J f Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2004;126: 363–6.
27. 27. Kvam E, Bondevik O, Gjerdet NR. Traumatic ulcers and pain in adults during orthodontic treatment. Comm Dent Oral Epidemiol 1989;17: 154–7.
28. 28. Bergius M, Kiliaridis S, Berggren U Pain in orthodontics. A review and discussion of the literature. J Orofac Orthop 2000;61: 125–37.
29. 29. Ngan P, Kess B, Wilson S. Perception of discomfort by patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1989; 96: 47–53.
30. 30. Polat O, Karaman AI. Pain control during fixed orthodontic appliance therapy. Angle Orthod 2005 ; 75: 214–9.
31. 31. Bock NC, von Bremen J, Kraft M, Ruf S. Plaque control effectiveness and handling of interdental brushes during multibracket treatment: a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Orthod 2010;32: 408–13.