Skip to main content

Table 2 Subgroup results (mean ± SD) of experimental cleaning efficacy (ECE in %) and forces (in N)

From: New experimental setup for the measurement of cleaning efficacy and force of interdental aids in 3D-reproduced interdental areas

Morphology and size of interdental areaHeight of concave interdental areaECE in %p-valueinsertion force in Np-valuemean push in Np-valuemean pull in Np-value
IRP-FIRP-SIRP-FIRP-SIRP-FIRP-SIRP-FIRP-S
Isosceles triangle 31.18 ± 7.2231.09 ± 1.55p = 0.9443.34 ± 1.091.60 ± 0.83p < 0.0011.55 ± 0.500.85 ± 0.38p < 0.0010.73 ± 0.260.45 ± 0.19p < 0.001
convex 16.69 ± 9.6113.08 ± 4.58p = 0.0032.30 ± 1.121.47 ± 1.18p < 0.0011.25 ± 0.60.87 ± 0.64p < 0.0010.65 ± 1.730.47 ± 0.33p < 0.001
concave3 mm21.08 ± 6.5919.54 ± 5.75p = 0.1315.20 ± 1.843.39 ± 1.95p < 0.0012.45 ± 0.901.67 ± 0.97p < 0.0010.96 ± 0.230.8 ± 0.45p = 0.004
5 mm17.32 ± 8.1713.58 ± 8.20p = 0.0071.98 ± 0.881.33 ± 0.87p < 0.0011.01 ± 0.460.71 ± 0.43p < 0.0010.48 ± 0.210.35 ± 0.21p < 0.001
3 + 5 mm19.10 ± 7.6716.86 ± 7.55p = 0.0133.60 ± 2.162.36 ± 1.83p < 0.0011.73 ± 1.021.19 ± 0.89p < 0.0010.72 ± 0.330.57 ± 0.42p < 0.001
1.0 mm 19.14 ± 11.718.36 ± 13.22p = 0.2133.23 ± 1.731.73 ± 1.10p < 0.0011.56 ± 0.770.88 ± 0.47p < 0.0010.74 ± 0.320.44 ± 0.21p < 0.001
1.1 mm 17.68 ± 7.4618.82 ± 7.58p = 0.8442.22 ± 1.042.11 ± 1.93p = 0.6051.05 ± 0.441.13 ± 0.98p < 0.0010.56 ± 0.210.57 ± 0.47p < 0.001
1.3 mm 28.17 ± 6.8220.53 ± 8.59p < 0.0014.13 ± 1.961.97 ± 1.19p < 0.0012.10 ± 0.901.04 ± 0.54p < 0.0010.82 ± 0.240.53 ± 0.25p < 0.001
  1. Force for insertion (IF) into the artificial interdental area as well as during ten cleaning cycles (mean push/pull) for cleaning different types (isosceles triangle, convex, concave) and sizes (1.0 mm, 1.1 mm, 1.3 mm) of the interdental area separated for the tested interdental rubber picks with fingers-design (IRP-F) versus slats-design (IRP-S). We assumed p < 0.05 to be statistically significant (ANOVA, paired t-test, two sided)