More effective than String Floss
Waterpik® Water Flosser: Twice as Effective as String Floss for Reducing Gingival Bleeding
The Effect of Interdental Cleaning Devices on Plaque Biofilm and Gingival Bleeding
Rosema NAM et al. The effect of different interdental cleaning devices on gingival bleeding. J Int Acad Periodontol 2011; 13(1):2-10.
Reduction of Gingival Bleeding – 14 Day Results
Reduction of Gingival Bleeding – 30 Day Results
Objective
To evaluate the efficacy of a manual toothbrush plus a Waterpik® Water Flosser versus a manual toothbrush plus traditional floss, to reduce gingival bleeding and plaque biofilm.
Methodology
One hundred four subjects participated in this 30-day, randomized, single blind study. Group A used a Waterpik® Water Flosser with the Classic Jet Tip plus a manual toothbrush, Group B used a Waterpik® Water Flosser with the Plaque Seeker® Tip plus a manual toothbrush and Group C used waxed string floss plus a manual toothbrush. Subjects brushed twice daily and used either the Water Flosser or floss once daily in the evening. Gingival bleeding and plaque biofilm were evaluated at day 14 and day 30.
Results
After 14 days, used in conjunction with manual toothbrushing, the Waterpik® Water Flosser with the Classic Jet Tip was twice as effective as traditional floss at reducing gingival bleeding. At 30 days, the relative improvement in gingival bleeding for the Water Flosser groups was even more dramatic. There were no significant differences between the Water Flosser Classic Jet Tip and the Plaque Seeker® Tip.
Conclusion
The Waterpik® Water Flosser is a more effective alternative to traditional dental floss for reducing gingival bleeding and improving oral health.
Waterpik® Water Flossers: 51% More Effective than String Floss for Reducing Gingivitis
Comparison of Irrigation to Floss as an Adjunct to Toothbrushing: Effect on Bleeding, Gingivitis, and Supragingival Plaque
Barnes CM, et al. J Clin Dent, 2005; 16(3): 71-77. Study conducted at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Dentistry, Lincoln, Nebraska
Reduction of Gingival Bleeding – Facial
Reduction of Gingival Bleeding – Lingual
Reduction of Gingival Inflammation – Facial
Reduction of Gingival Inflammation – Lingual
Objective
To compare the plaque removal efficacy of the Waterpik® Water Flosser to string floss combined with a manual toothbrush.
Methodology
Seventy subjects participated in this randomized, single use, single blind, parallel clinical study. Subjects abstained from any oral hygiene for 23 – 25 hours prior to their appointment. Subjects were screened and assigned to one of two groups: Waterpik® Water Flosser plus a manual toothbrush, or waxed string floss plus a manual toothbrush. Instructions were provided for each product used. Each participant brushed for 2-minutes using the Bass method. Group 1 used the Water Flosser with 500 ml of warm water and group 2 used waxed string floss cleaning all areas between the teeth. Subjects were observed to make sure they covered all areas and followed instructions. Scores were recorded for whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, and lingual regions for each subject using the Rustogi Modification Navy Plaque Index.
Results
The Waterpik® Water Flosser was 29% more effective than string floss for overall plaque removal, 29% for approximal surfaces, and 33% for marginal surfaces.
Conclusion
The Waterpik® Water Flosser is significantly more effective than string floss in removing plaque for all tooth surfaces.
The Waterpik® Water Flosser: Significantly More Effective than String Floss for Removing Plaque
Comparison of Two Interdental Devices on the Reduction of Plaque
Goyal CR, et al. Journal of Clinical Dentistry 2013;24(2):37-42.
Plaque Removal – string vs water flosser
Objective
To compare the plaque removal efficacy of the Waterpik® Water Flosser to string floss combined with a manual toothbrush.
Methodology
Seventy subjects participated in this randomized, single use, single blind, parallel clinical study. Subjects abstained from any oral hygiene for 23 – 25 hours prior to their appointment. Subjects were screened and assigned to one of two groups: Waterpik® Water Flosser plus a manual toothbrush, or waxed string floss plus a manual toothbrush. Instructions were provided for each product used. Each participant brushed for 2-minutes using the Bass method. Group 1 used the Water Flosser with 500 ml of warm water and group 2 used waxed string floss cleaning all areas between the teeth. Subjects were observed to make sure they covered all areas and followed instructions. Scores were recorded for whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, and lingual regions for each subject using the Rustogi Modification Navy Plaque Index.
Results
The Waterpik® Water Flosser was 29% more effective than string floss for overall plaque removal, 29% for approximal surfaces, and 33% for marginal surfaces.
Conclusion
The Waterpik® Water Flosser is significantly more effective than string floss in removing plaque for all tooth surfaces.
The Waterpik® Water Flosser is 3X as effective as string floss for Orthodontic patients
The Effect of a Dental Water Jet with Orthodontic Tip on Plaque and Bleeding in Adolescent Orthodontic Patients with Fixed Appliances.
Sharma NC, Lyle DM, Qaqish JG, Galustians J, Schuller R. Am J Ortho Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 133(4):565-571.
Plaque Removal for Orthodontic Patients
Plaque Removal for Orthodontic Patients
Reduction of Gingival Bleeding for Orthodontic Patients
Objective
To compare the use of a manual toothbrush and the Waterpik® Water Flosser with the Orthodontic Tip to manual toothbrushing and flossing with a floss threader on bleeding and plaque biofilm reductions in adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances. A control group consisted of brushing only.
Methodology
One hundred five adolescents with fixed orthodontics participated in this single-center, randomized study. Bleeding and plaque biofilm scores were collected at baseline and days 14 and 28.
Results
The Waterpik® Water Flosser was over 3 times more effective than flossing and over 5 times more effective than brushing alone for the reduction of plaque biofilm. For bleeding, the Water Flosser was 26% better than flossing and 53% better than brushing alone.
Conclusion
Adding a Waterpik® Water Flosser with the Orthodontic Tip to manual toothbrushing is significantly more effective at improving oral health in adolescent orthodontic patients, including those with braces, than adding manual floss or brushing only.
Waterpik® Water Flosser: More Than 2X As Effective As String Floss for Implant Patients
The Effect of a Water Flosser with Plaque Seeker Tip® on Gingival Bleeding for Implant Patients
Magnuson B, et al. Comparison of the effect of two interdental cleaning devices around implants on the reduction of bleeding: A 30-day randomized clinical trial. Compend of Contin Ed in Dent 2013; 34(Special Issue 8):2-7. Study conducted at Tufts University, School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Reduction of Gingival Bleeding – 30 Day Results
Objective
To compare the efficacy of a Waterpik® Water Flosser to string floss for implant patients.
Methodology
Subjects were randomized into two groups; Group 1 used a manual toothbrush and a Waterpik® Water Flosser with the Plaque Seeker® Tip (WF) and Group 2 used a manual toothbrush and string floss (SF). There were 22 implants in each group and the primary outcome was the reduction in the incidence of bleeding on probing. Subjects brushed twice a day and used either the WF or SF once a day.
Results
There were no differences between the groups at baseline. At 30 days, 18 of the 22 (81.8%) implants in the WF group showed a significant reduction in BOP compared to 6 of the 18 (33.3%) from the floss group. The WF group experienced 145% better reduction in gingival bleeding around implants vs. the string floss group (p=0.0018).
Conclusion
The Waterpik® Water Flosser is significantly more effective than string floss for improving gingival health around implants and is safe to use.
