IADR Abstract Archives
Laboratory Plaque Removal Efficiency by Prophylaxis Cup Products
Objectives: The plaque removal efficiency of three prophylaxis products was determined using two established methods, Interproximal (IAE) and Subgingival (SAE) access efficacy assays, and a new width of plaque removal (Wi) method. A new product (PCP) contained a cleaning and polishing agent incorporated into a unique cup design. The other two (E and W) are commercially available prophylaxis products.
Methods: Butler Prophyciency Clean & Polish (PCP), Young Elite (E) and Young Web (W) were compared. Prior to testing, PCP cups were wetted with water alone and E and W products were filled with NUPRO coarse prophylaxis paste. Standard conditions were used in all three assays (5sec treatment, 2,500 RPM, 125g force and n=24). For IAE, products were positioned at 45°, moved in a vertical motion at 2 strokes/sec and maximum depth of plaque removed from tooth midline to interproximal space was determined. For SAE, products were positioned at 90° at the gingival margin and plaque removed under the gingival margin was measured. For Wi, products were positioned at 90° and width of plaque removed was determined. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test for pairwise comparisons.
Results: In IAE and Wi, PCP was superior to E and W (p<0.001). In SAE, PCP was superior to E (P<0.001) and PCP was superior to W (P<0.01). E and W were not different in IAE or Wi (p>0.05). W was superior to E in SAE (p<0.001).
Conclusions: The new product exhibited significantly superior interproximal, subgingival and width of plaque removal compared to the two commercially available products. These results suggest better and more rapid plaque removal may be achieved using the new product in a clinical setting.
Methods: Butler Prophyciency Clean & Polish (PCP), Young Elite (E) and Young Web (W) were compared. Prior to testing, PCP cups were wetted with water alone and E and W products were filled with NUPRO coarse prophylaxis paste. Standard conditions were used in all three assays (5sec treatment, 2,500 RPM, 125g force and n=24). For IAE, products were positioned at 45°, moved in a vertical motion at 2 strokes/sec and maximum depth of plaque removed from tooth midline to interproximal space was determined. For SAE, products were positioned at 90° at the gingival margin and plaque removed under the gingival margin was measured. For Wi, products were positioned at 90° and width of plaque removed was determined. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test for pairwise comparisons.
Results: In IAE and Wi, PCP was superior to E and W (p<0.001). In SAE, PCP was superior to E (P<0.001) and PCP was superior to W (P<0.01). E and W were not different in IAE or Wi (p>0.05). W was superior to E in SAE (p<0.001).
Conclusions: The new product exhibited significantly superior interproximal, subgingival and width of plaque removal compared to the two commercially available products. These results suggest better and more rapid plaque removal may be achieved using the new product in a clinical setting.