supporting the efficacy of the Sulcabrush®
have been performed by: Columbia University, University
at Buffalo, Indiana University
Comparative Study of Sulcabrush®
vs. Floss on PI and GI.
Dr. A. Zakarian, Dr. L. M. Steinberg, Dr. F. Odusola and Dr.
I. D. Mandel
Columbia University, School of Dental and Oral Surgery, Department
of Periodontics, New York, NY, USA.
study sought to determine the usefulness of a new interdental
brush in reducing dental plaque accumulation and gingival
inflammation. Thirty adult subjects were followed for three
consecutive 30 day periods. Examinations were conducted at
baseline 30, 60 and 90 days and gingival and plaque indices
were scored. In the first thirty day period 15 subjects used
the Sulcabrush® once
daily and a soft bristle toothbrush as their routine while
the other 15 subjects used unwaxed dental floss once daily
accompanied by routine soft bristle toothbrushing. At the
end of 30 days, all subjects were examined and were asked
to refrain from sulcabrushing and return to their everyday
oral hygiene routine for the next 30 days. On day 60,
subjects crossed over - those who had sulcabrushed now flossed
once daily while those who flossed now sulcabrushed once daily
for the final 30 day period. Day 90, all subjects were examined.
When the use of Sulcabrush® is
compared to floss, it was found that both led to statistically
significant reductions in plaque index, although one is not
more effective than the other. Both Sulcabrush®
and floss led to statistically significant reductions
in gingival index.
However, the Sulcabrush® effect
on gingival index was significantly greater than unwaxed dental
floss. This improvement may be due to the ability of the Sulcabrush®
to get into areas not accessible to dental floss.
from the proceedings of the American Academy of Dental Research
AADR Annual Meeting and Exhibition, March 1992, Boston, Massachusetts
back to top
Comparative Efficacy of Sulcular Oral Hygiene Brush (Sulcabrush®)
and Dental Floss.
M. L. Mather, B.S., O. Shibly, D.D.S., M.S., R.L. Comeau A.A.S.,
R.D.H., M.A. Bessinger, B.S., and R.E. Cohen, D.D.S., M.S.,
SUNY at Buffalo, NY, University at Buffalo, School of Dental
Medicine, Department of Periodontics, Buffalo, NY.
purpose of this split-mouth clinical study was to compare
the efficacy of a sulcular oral hygiene brush (Sulcabrush®)
to dental floss with regard to plaque removal and reduction
of gingival inflammation. Patients selected for this study
(n=33) were at least 21 years of age, with at least 10 teeth
(3 contiguous) on each side. The baseline gingival index (GI;
modified Silness-Loe) and plaque index (PI; modified Quigley
Hein) were 1.5 or greater. The stain index (SI) and Eastman
Interdental Bleeding Index (BI) also were measured at Baseline.
Written instructions and extensive clinical home care demonstrations
were provided to all subjects for all oral hygiene procedures.
Patients then performed home care twice daily using a soft
toothbrush. This procedure was followed, once daily in the
evening, by use of floss in 1 maxillary and 1 mandibular quadrant,
and the use of the Sulcular brush around the remaining teeth.
Compliance was assessed by patient diaries. GI, PI, BI and
SI were measured on both the sulcular brush and dental floss
sides. In addition, anterior/posterior and interproximal/facial-lingual
measurements were analyzed by analysis of variance and paired
t-tests. We found that the sulcular brush was significantly
more effective in reducing plaque in molar sites than dental
floss (P<.05). In addition, the sulcular brush was as effective
as dental floss in reducing plaque (P<.003), gingival bleeding
(P<.0001), and gingival inflammation (P<.004) in all
other areas examined. Collectively, these data suggest that
the sulcular brush may be a useful addition to patients
home care regimen. This study was supported in part by a grant
from Sulcabrush® Inc.
at the American Academy of Periodontology, Research Forum,
back to top
A Clinical Evaluation of the Sulcabrush®
E. B. Hancock, DDS, MSD, C. M. Brown, DDS, MSD, and T. J.
Wolfe, DDS, MSD.
Indiana University, School of Dentistry, Department of Periodontics,
Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of
a unituft brush in combination with a conventional brush for
plaque removal and maintenance of gingival health. Thirty
patients presenting for routine dental care were examined
and scored for plaque deposits and gingival inflammation.
All subjects received a dental prophylaxis consisting of removal
of all supragingival and subgingival deposits and polishing
of the clinical crowns. Subjects were subsequently evaluated
at 1 week, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. The addition of a unituft
brush to the patients' regimen of oral hygiene procedures
resulted in significant reductions at 12 weeks in both plaque_scores
(P<.05) and gingival inflammation (P<.01) when compared
to the use of the conventional brush alone.
from Clinical Preventive Dentistry, January 1991.
back to top