The efficacy of dental floss in addition to a toothbrush on plaque and parameters of gingival inflammation: a systematic review.
The efficacy of dental floss in addition to a toothbrush on plaque and parameters of gingival inflammation: a systematic review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1601-5037.2008.00336.x
复制
发表时间：
2008-11-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Van der Weijden, G A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Berchier, C E;Slot, D E;Van der Weijden, G A
目的：本研究的目的是系统地评估使用牙线和刷牙与单独刷牙对牙菌斑和牙龈炎的辅助作用。材料：对MEDLINE和科克伦中央对照试验登记处（CENTRAL）数据库进行了检索，直至2007年12月，以确定适当的研究。结果：对1166篇MEDLINE-Pubmed和187篇科克伦文献的标题和摘要进行独立筛选，筛选出符合入选标准的11篇文献。通过数据提取收集平均值和SD。对单独刷牙或刷牙和使用牙线进行描述性比较。大部分的研究没有显示牙线对牙菌斑和牙龈炎的临床参数有好处。一个荟萃分析进行了菌斑指数和牙龈index.CONCLUSIONS：牙科专业人士应确定，在个别患者的基础上，高质量的牙线是否是一个可实现的目标。根据这种全面的文献检索和批判性分析的结果，得出的结论是，使用牙线的常规说明没有科学证据支持。
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess systematically the adjunctive effect of both flossing and toothbrushing versus toothbrushing alone on plaque and gingivitis.MATERIALS: The MEDLINE and Cochrane Central register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched through December 2007 to identify appropriate studies. The variables of plaque and gingivitis were selected as outcomes.RESULTS: Independent screening of titles and abstracts of 1166 MEDLINE-Pubmed and 187 Cochrane papers resulted in 11 publications that met the eligibility criteria. Mean values and SD were collected by data extraction. Descriptive comparisons are presented for brushing alone or brushing and flossing. A greater part of the studies did not show a benefit for floss on plaque and clinical parameters of gingivitis. A meta-analysis was performed for the plaque index and gingival index.CONCLUSIONS: The dental professional should determine, on an individual patient basis, whether high-quality flossing is an achievable goal. In light of the results of this comprehensive literature search and critical analysis, it is concluded that a routine instruction to use floss is not supported by scientific evidence.