Oral irrigation plus toothbrushing vs Flossing plus toothbrushing: Gingivitis
It is very uncertain whether oral irrigation plus toothbrushing changes gingivitis (gingival index) compared with flossing plus toothbrushing (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Oral irrigation plus toothbrushing vs Flossing plus toothbrushing Gingivitis (gingival index) · Adults, 16 years and older (dentate) · 1 month It is very uncertain whether oral irrigation plus toothbrushing changes gingivitis (gingival index) compared with flossing plus toothbrushing (very low certainty). Home use of interdental cleaning devices, in addition to toothbrushing, for preventing and controlling… (2019) · Cochrane All outcomes | MD -0.06 [-0.12, 0.00] | 1 study · 63 participants | Very low |
Oral irrigation plus toothbrushing vs Flossing plus toothbrushing Gingivitis (proportion of bleeding sites) · Adults, 16 years and older (dentate) · 1 month Oral irrigation plus toothbrushing may leads to lower gingivitis (proportion of bleeding sites) compared with flossing plus toothbrushing (low certainty). Home use of interdental cleaning devices, in addition to toothbrushing, for preventing and controlling… (2019) · Cochrane All outcomes | MD -0.12 [-0.19, -0.05] | 2 studies · 133 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Home use of interdental cleaning devices, in addition to toothbrushing, for preventing and controlling periodontal diseases and dental… 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2019-01-16 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.