A Colorimetric Interdental Probe as a Standard Method to Evaluate Interdental Efficiency of Interdental Brush
D. Bourgeois1, *, F. Carrouel2, 3, J.C. Llodra2, 4, M. Bravo4, S. Viennot1
Identifiers and Pagination:Year: 2015
First Page: 431
Last Page: 437
Publisher ID: TODENTJ-9-431
Article History:Received Date: 13/2/2015
Revision Received Date: 31/8/2015
Acceptance Date: 29/9/2015
Electronic publication date: 23/12/2015
Collection year: 2015
open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted, noncommercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the concordance between the empirical choice of interdental brushes of different diameters compared to the gold standard, the IAP CURAPROX© calibrating colorimetric probe. It is carried out with the aim of facilitating the consensus development of best practices. All the subjects’ interproximal spaces were evaluated using the reference technique (colorimetric probe), then after a time lapse of 1.2 ± 0.2 hours, using the empirical clinical technique (brushes) by the same examiner. Each examiner explored 3 subjects. The order the patients were examined with the colorimetric interdental probe (CIP) was random. 446 sites were selected in the study out of 468 potential sites. The correspondence of scores between interdental bushes vs. colorimetric probe is 43.0% [95%-CI: 38.5-47.6]. In 33.41% of the 446 sites, the brush is inferior to the probe; in 23.54% of cases, the brush is superior to the probe. Among the discrepancies there is thus a tendency for the subjects to use brushes with smaller diameter than that recommended by the colorimetric probe. This review has found very high-quality evidence that colorimetric probes plus interdental brushing is more beneficial than interdental brushing alone for increase the concordance between the empirical choice of interdental brushes of different diameters compared to the gold standard. Uncertainties remain and further research is required to provide detailed data on user satisfaction.