Skip to main content

Table 1 Subgroup results (mean ± SD) of experimental cleaning forces (ECF in N) of all test products.

From: The influence of artificial saliva on the cleaning force of interdental rubber picks: an in-vitro comparison

 

ECF in N

IDR 1.0 mm

IDR 1.1 mm

IDR 1.3 mm

Isosceles triangle

Concave

Convex

Isosceles triangle

Concave

Convex

Isosceles triangle

Concave

Convex

SPA Small

Without AS

2.38 ± 0.26**

2.27 ± 0.31**

1.27 ± 0.18

1.26 ± 0.18

1.72 ± 0.28***

0.89 ± 0.16

0.76 ± 0.09

1.46 ± 0.31*, ***

0.39 ± 0.07

With AS

0.77 ± 0.03

0.90 ± 0.05

0.34 ± 0.03***

0.44 ± 0.05

0.38 ± 0.02**

0.37 ± 0.02**, ***

0.31 ± 0.07

0.48 ± 0.03

0.17 ± 0.01

SPA Regular

Without AS

2.92 ± 0.26**

2.49 ± 0.44**

1.34 ± 0.21

1.86 ± 0.13**

1.89 ± 0.18**

0.98 ± 0.14

0.95 ± 0.09

1.31 ± 0.19

0.56 ± 0.25

With AS

1.24 ± 0.08**

1.21 ± 0.06**

0.41 ± 0.02***

0.69 ± 0.05**

0.71 ± 0.04**, ***

0.43 ± 0.01***

0.44 ± 0.04

0.68 ± 0.02***

0.21 ± 0.01

SPA Large

Without AS

n.a.

n.a.

3.63 ± 0.33

n.a.

n.a.

2.91 ± 0.31

2.72 ± 0.34**

n.a.

1.91 ± 0.18

With AS

n.a.

n.a.

1.23 ± 0.05

2.47 ± 0.27

1.64 ± 0.05

1.01 ± 0.04

1.12 ± 0.07

2.04 ± 0.06

0.76 ± 0.02

SPA+ Small

Without AS

3.52 ± 0.41**

2.97 ± 0.45**, ***

1.62 ± 0.17

2.22 ± 0.17**

2.45 ± 0.29**, ***

1.09 ± 0.15

1.05 ± 0.12

1.48 ± 0.15*

0.64 ± 0.08

With AS

1.48 ± 0.07

2.06 ± 0.06

0.72 ± 0.03

1.11 ± 0.07**

1.12 ± 0.03**

0.57 ± 0.01

0.53 ± 0.04

0.68 ± 0.02

0.44 ± 0.01

SPA+ Regular

Without AS

n.a.

n.a.

1.65 ± 0.26

2.31 ± 0.31**

2.51 ± 0.31**

1.22 ± 0.15

1.07 ± 0.13

1.64 ± 0.13

0.86 ± 0.09

With AS

1.82 ± 0.04

2.58 ± 0.11

0.90 ± 0.03

1.32 ± 0.04**

1.31 ± 0.06**

0.82 ± 0.03

0.63 ± 0.04

0.88 ± 0.03

0.56 ± 0.02

SPA+ Large

Without AS

n.a.

n.a.

3.42 ± 0.26

n.a.

n.a.

2.73 ± 0.31

2.00 ± 0.32

3.40 ± 0.63

1.72 ± 0.27

With AS

n.a.

n.a.

1.39 ± 0.11

2.78 ± 0.14

2.13 ± 0.13

1.23 ± 0.07

1.03 ± 0.05

1.42 ± 0.08

0.91 ± 0.04

  1. Force during ten cleaning cycles (mean ± SD) 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 (IRP). We assumed p < 0.05 to be statistically significant (Mann-Whitney-U-Test, Kruskal-Wallis-Test, two-sided with Bonferroni adjustment (p ≤ 0.0167)). Differences between testing with artificial saliva (AS) versus without always significant (p ≤ 0.001)
  2. * no significant difference between SPA versus SPA+
  3. ** no significant difference inner group of test product between different types (isosceles triangle, convex, concave)
  4. *** no significant difference inner group of test product between different sizes (1.0 mm, 1.1 mm, 1.3 mm)