IADR Abstract Archives
Comparative Evaluation of Dental Plaque Indication Methods
Objectives: Dental plaque (DP) indication is considered among the most effective methods of motivating oral hygiene. This study compares two methods of indication: Qscan plus (Q+) device and disclosing tablets (DT).
Methods: Q+ is based on quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) technology which allows visualising porphyrin-containing DP associated with pathogenic anaerobic bacteria.
DT are erythrosine-based.
60 patients aged 5-21 years were examined and divided into two groups: 30 aged 17-21 (1st group) and 30 aged 5-7 (2nd group).
The study procedure included examining and photographing 6 anterior teeth of the upper and lower jaw using Q+ (both groups) and DT (1st group), questioning (1st group) and creating two “maps” of DP distribution. One shows pathogenic DP visible in Q+; the other shows DP disclosed with tablets.
Results: The area of DP detected by DT is significantly larger than the area of fluorescent plaque seen in Q+.
In the 1st group, the largest accumulations of DP porphyrins were found in the lower jaw anterior teeth interdental spaces (31-33 and 41-43) and on the canines (13, 23, 33, 43).
In the 2nd group, pathogenic DP was mostly detected in the lower jaw anterior teeth interdental spaces (73-83) and on the upper and lower jaw anterior teeth cervical areas.
86.67% of the participants would prefer to use the Q+ as a personal plaque indicator.
Conclusions: Based on the modeling of dental plaque distribution maps indicated by different methods, it was concluded that pathogenic dental plaque covers a smaller area than plaque generally.
The study participants favored dental plaque optical indication by using the QScan Plus device over the more traditional staining method.
Methods: Q+ is based on quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) technology which allows visualising porphyrin-containing DP associated with pathogenic anaerobic bacteria.
DT are erythrosine-based.
60 patients aged 5-21 years were examined and divided into two groups: 30 aged 17-21 (1st group) and 30 aged 5-7 (2nd group).
The study procedure included examining and photographing 6 anterior teeth of the upper and lower jaw using Q+ (both groups) and DT (1st group), questioning (1st group) and creating two “maps” of DP distribution. One shows pathogenic DP visible in Q+; the other shows DP disclosed with tablets.
Results: The area of DP detected by DT is significantly larger than the area of fluorescent plaque seen in Q+.
In the 1st group, the largest accumulations of DP porphyrins were found in the lower jaw anterior teeth interdental spaces (31-33 and 41-43) and on the canines (13, 23, 33, 43).
In the 2nd group, pathogenic DP was mostly detected in the lower jaw anterior teeth interdental spaces (73-83) and on the upper and lower jaw anterior teeth cervical areas.
86.67% of the participants would prefer to use the Q+ as a personal plaque indicator.
Conclusions: Based on the modeling of dental plaque distribution maps indicated by different methods, it was concluded that pathogenic dental plaque covers a smaller area than plaque generally.
The study participants favored dental plaque optical indication by using the QScan Plus device over the more traditional staining method.