The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 5 , ISSUE 3 ( August, 2004 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

The Effects of Different Application Techniques and Orifices on the Amount of Dentifrice Dispensed

Ayşegül Ölmez, Dilek Tüfekcioğlu, Elgin Erdemli

Citation Information : Ölmez A, Tüfekcioğlu D, Erdemli E. The Effects of Different Application Techniques and Orifices on the Amount of Dentifrice Dispensed. J Contemp Dent Pract 2004; 5 (3):74-81.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-5-3-74

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 00-08-2004

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2004; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate three different methods (ST: Standard technique; PS: Pea-size; TT: Transverse technique) for dentifrice use in children between 5-7 years of age, as well as to compare the amount of dentifrice dispensed by using tubes with different orifices (cresent or round shaped).

Methods and Materials

One hundred children who dispensed the dentifrice themselves were asked to apply the quantity of dentifrice they usually used (ST or TT) (Phase-I). In Phase-II they were instructed to apply a PS amount, and in Phase III the TT was demonstrated. Statistical analysis was obtained by using Anova and t-test.

Results

Most of the children (82 patients) preferred to use the ST rather than the TT (18 patients). A decrease in the dentifrice amount was obtained with both of the shaped orifices after the instruction of PS or demonstration of the TT (p< 0.05). It was observed the amount of dentifrice dispended decreased when a cresent-shaped orifice was used.

Conclusion

Children usually preferred to use the ST rather than the TT before the instruction or demonstration by the operator. The amount of dentifrice dispensed generally decreased when a dentifrice tube with a crescentshaped orifice was used.

Citation

Ölmez A, Tüfekciogğlu D, Erdemli E. The Effects of Different Application Techniques and Orifices on the Amount of Dentifrice Dispensed. J Contemp Dent Pract 2004 August;(5)3:074-081.


PDF Share
  1. Fluoride levels in whole saliva of preschool children after brushing with 0.25 g (pea-sized) as compared to 1.0 g (full-brush) of a fluoride dentifrice. Pediatr Dent. 1996 Jul-Aug;18(4):277-80.
  2. A review of fluoride dentifrice related to dental fluorosis. Pediatr Dent. 1999 Jul-Aug;21(4):265-71. Review.
  3. Fluoride in toothpastes for children: suggestion for change. Pediatr Dent. 1988 Sep;10(3):185-8. No abstract available.
  4. A critique of topical fluoride methods (dentifrices, mouthrinses, operator-, and self-applied gels) in an era of decreased caries and increased fluorosis prevalence. J Public Health Dent. 1991 Winter;51(1):23-41. Review.
  5. Proceedings of the workshop: changing patterns in systemic fluoride intake. J Dent Res 1992;71:1212-1265.
  6. The changing patterns of systemic fluoride intake. J Dent Res. 1992 May;71(5):1228-37. Review.
  7. A review of fluoride intake from fluoride dentifrice. ASDC J Dent Child. 1993 Mar-Apr;60(2):115-24. Review.
  8. A review of fluoride exposures and ingestion. Paper presented at the Canadian workshop “Evaluation of Current Recommendation Concerning Fluoride”. Manuscript Submitted to Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1992.
  9. An investigation of the transverse technique of dentifrice application to reduce the amount of fluoride dentifrice for young children. Pediatr Dent. 2000 Jul-Aug;22(4):312-7.
  10. Risk of fluorosis in a fluoridated population. Implications for the dentist and hygienist. J Am Dent Assoc. 1995 Dec;126(12):1617-24.
  11. Mechanical and Chemotherapeutic Home Oral Hygiene. In: McDonald RE, Avery DR, editors. Dentistry for Child and Adolescent. 6 th ed. Boston: Mosby Co, 1994:256-282.
  12. Dentifrice usage among Danish children. J Dent Res. 1988 Aug;67(8):1114-7.
  13. The use of fluoride-containing toothpastes in young children: the scientific evidence for recommending a small quantity. Pediatr Dent. 1992 Nov-Dec;14(6):384-7. Review. No abstract available.
  14. Occurrence and management of dental fluorosis. Int Dent J. 2001 Oct;51(5):325-33. Review.
  15. [Fluorosis: diagnosis, risk assessment and epidemiology] Rev Belge Med Dent. 2001;56(4):291-309. Review. French.
  16. Enamel mineralization disturbances in 12-year-old children with known early exposure to fluorides. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1982 Dec;10(6):335-9.
  17. al. Use of fluoride by young children and prevalence of mottled enamel. Adv Dent Res. 1989 Sep;3(2):177-82.
  18. al. Fluoride intake from foods, beverages and dentifrice by young children in communities with negligibly and optimally fluoridated water: a pilot study. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1999 Aug;27(4):288-97.
  19. al. Reduction in dental caries with four concentrations of sodium fluoride in a dentifrice: a meta-analysis evaluation. J Clin Dent. 2001;12(3):57-62.
  20. al. Relative anti-caries efficacy of 1100, 1700, 2200, and 2800 ppm fluoride ion in a sodium fluoride dentifrice over 1 year. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2001 Oct;29(5):382-9.
  21. Guidelines on the use of fluoride in children: An EAPD policy document. Eur J Pediatr Dent 2000;1:7-12.
  22. Is the fluoride concentration limit of 1,500 ppm in cosmetics (EU guideline) still upto- date? Caries Res. 2001;35Suppl 1:22-5.
  23. Young children and fluoride toothpaste. Br Dent J. 1994 Jul 9;177(1):17-20.
  24. Factors influencing the amount of fluoride toothpaste applied by the mothers of young children. Br Dent J. 1997 Dec 13-27;183(11-12):412-4.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.