RESUMO
Purpose@#This pilot study was conducted to evaluate the cleaning efficacy of an angled implant brush for home oral hygiene of full-arch fixed-implant prostheses. @*Methods@#Forty-one patients treated with a full-arch implant rehabilitation in the maxilla or mandible (164 implants) for at least 4 months were enrolled. The screw-retained fixed prostheses were removed and baseline (T0) parameters were recorded, including plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP). All patients completed a 5-item questionnaire on hygiene maintenance and received an implant brush for home hygiene. After 1 month (T1) PI, PD, and BOP were recorded again and patients completed a 7-item questionnaire to evaluate their satisfaction with the implant brush. One-way repeatedmeasures analysis of variance was conducted to evaluate the significance of changes in PI, PD, and BOP. A P value <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. @*Results@#A statistically significant reduction of BOP (0.62±0.6 at T0 vs. 0.5±0.5 at T1; P=0.032) was found, while no statistically significant changes in PD (1.74±0.5 mm at T0 vs. 1.77±0.5 mm at T1; P=0.050) or PI (1.9±0.7 at T0 vs. 1.7±0.7 at T1; P=0.280) occurred. According to the 7-item questionnaire, patients reported no difficulty in using the angled brush (63.4%) and deemed it highly (46.3%) or very highly (4.8%) effective in improving their home oral hygiene. @*Conclusions@#Within the limits of the present pilot study, the patients experienced a reduction of BOP 1 month after being instructed to use the angled implant brush. The angled implant brush appeared to be a well-accepted device for home-care hygiene of full-arch fixedimplant rehabilitations.
RESUMO
Purpose@#This pilot study was conducted to evaluate the cleaning efficacy of an angled implant brush for home oral hygiene of full-arch fixed-implant prostheses. @*Methods@#Forty-one patients treated with a full-arch implant rehabilitation in the maxilla or mandible (164 implants) for at least 4 months were enrolled. The screw-retained fixed prostheses were removed and baseline (T0) parameters were recorded, including plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP). All patients completed a 5-item questionnaire on hygiene maintenance and received an implant brush for home hygiene. After 1 month (T1) PI, PD, and BOP were recorded again and patients completed a 7-item questionnaire to evaluate their satisfaction with the implant brush. One-way repeatedmeasures analysis of variance was conducted to evaluate the significance of changes in PI, PD, and BOP. A P value <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. @*Results@#A statistically significant reduction of BOP (0.62±0.6 at T0 vs. 0.5±0.5 at T1; P=0.032) was found, while no statistically significant changes in PD (1.74±0.5 mm at T0 vs. 1.77±0.5 mm at T1; P=0.050) or PI (1.9±0.7 at T0 vs. 1.7±0.7 at T1; P=0.280) occurred. According to the 7-item questionnaire, patients reported no difficulty in using the angled brush (63.4%) and deemed it highly (46.3%) or very highly (4.8%) effective in improving their home oral hygiene. @*Conclusions@#Within the limits of the present pilot study, the patients experienced a reduction of BOP 1 month after being instructed to use the angled implant brush. The angled implant brush appeared to be a well-accepted device for home-care hygiene of full-arch fixedimplant rehabilitations.
