Routine scale and polish at a fixed interval vs No scheduled scale and polish treatment: Participant satisfaction (perceived oral cleanliness)
- Population
- Healthy dentate adults with mild to moderate gingivitis, without severe periodontitis
- Intervention
- Routine scale and polish at a fixed interval
- Comparison
- No scheduled scale and polish treatment
- Outcome
- Participant satisfaction (perceived oral cleanliness)
Routine scale and polish (6-monthly or 12-monthly) led to lower participant satisfaction (perceived oral cleanliness) compared with no treatment (no scale and polish); GRADE not reported.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Routine scale and polish (6-monthly or 12-monthly) vs No treatment (no scale and polish) Participant satisfaction (perceived oral cleanliness) · Healthy dentate adults with mild to moderate gingivitis, without severe periodontitis · 24 months Routine scale and polish (6-monthly or 12-monthly) led to lower participant satisfaction (perceived oral cleanliness) compared with no treatment (no scale and polish); GRADE not reported. Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults (2013) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004625.PUB4, superseded | OR 0.36 [0.20, 0.65] | 1 study · 207 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2018-01-10 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Routine scale and polish at a fixed interval vs No scheduled scale and polish treatment · Dentate adults without severe periodontitis, regularly attending for dental care in… · 1 review
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.