Comparative efficacy of the standard flossing procedure and a new floss applicator in reducing interproximal bleeding: a short-term study

• Published in: Journal of periodontology (1970) Vol. 63; no. 9; p. 757
• Main Authors: Kinane, D F, Jenkins, W M, Paterson, A J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.09.1992
• Subjects: Administration, Topical; Adolescent; Adult; Aerosols; Chlorhexidine - administration & dosage; Chlorhexidine - analogs & derivatives; Chlorhexidine - therapeutic use; Dental Devices, Home Care; Equipment Design; Female; Gingival Hemorrhage - prevention & control; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Oral Hygiene - instrumentation; Oral Hygiene - methods; Patient Satisfaction; Placebos
• ISSN: 0022-3492; 1943-3670
• DOI: 10.1902/jop.1992.63.9.757

This was a parallel stratified study which examined the effect on gingival health of a new floss holder and applicator, designed to deliver a 25 microliters dose of 0.1% chlorhexidine solution to each interdental embrasure during the flossing procedure. Fifty-two patients with simple chronic gingivitis were stratified according to age, sex, and baseline interdental bleeding score and then assigned to one of three treatment groups. One of the following interdental cleaning agents was used once daily during a 2-week period: conventional floss; a flossing device with chlorhexidine; or a flossing device with placebo solution. Gingival health was assessed using the interdental bleeding index (IBI); i.e., the ratio of bleeding sites to the number of sites tested by stimulation with an interdental cleaner. The percentage reduction in bleeding amounted to 38.3% for conventional floss, 51.5% for the flossing device with chlorhexidine, and 51.4% for the flossing device with placebo. The reductions in both flossing device groups were significantly greater than that of the conventional floss group as determined by one-way ANOVA (F = 4.0; P = 0.024) and multiple range tests. There were no statistically significant differences between the two flossing device groups. There was no difference in patients' perception of ease of use of their respective materials; however, 72% of chlorhexidine users and 94% of placebo users, but only 24% of conventional floss users, felt that their interdental cleaning regimens left their mouths feeling fresher. It is therefore postulated that the pleasant tasting spray may have been an important stimulus to extended use of the new device and may explain its greater effectiveness.