Superior Plaque Removal – Clinical Results

Pre-treatment Plaque Biofilm – Plaque Removal

Removal of Plaque Biofilm with Classic Jet Tip

Removal of Plaque Biofilm with Orthodontic Tip

Objective

To evaluate the effect of the Waterpik^® Water Flosser on plaque biofilm removal using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Plaque removal clinical results.

Methodology

Eight periodontally involved teeth were extracted. Ten slices were cut from four teeth and were inoculated with saliva and left for four days to further grow plaque biofilm. Four slices were treated with the Classic Jet Tip, four slices were treated with the Orthodontic Tip, and two slices were used as controls. The remaining 4 teeth were treated with the Orthodontic Tip to evaluate the removal of calcified plaque biofilm. All teeth were treated using medium pressure for three seconds and evaluated by SEM.

Results

The Classic Jet Tip removed 99.9% and the Orthodontic Tip removed 99.8% of the plaque biofilm from the treated areas after a 3-second exposure as viewed by SEM. The Orthodontic Tip significantly removed the calcified biofilm from the surface of the four teeth as viewed by the naked eye and SEM.

Conclusion

The Waterpik^® Water Flosser significantly removes plaque biofilm.

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.

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.