The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 128, No 4, 444-447.
© 1997 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dean, M.
Right arrow Articles by Blank, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dean, M.
Right arrow Articles by Blank, L.
Related Collections
Right arrow Esthestics
Journal of the American Dental Association, Vol 128, Issue 4, 444-447
Copyright © 1997 by American Dental Association


RESEARCH

A comparison of two prophylaxis angles: disposable and autoclavable



MC Dean, DM Barnes, and LW Blank

Department of Dental Hygiene, University of Maryland at Baltimore 21201-1586, USA.

In a clinical trial, the authors evaluated the effectiveness of stain, plaque and debris removal, as well as patient and hygienist acceptance, of the disposable prophylaxis angle vs. the autoclavable prophylaxis angle. Thirty patients received a dental prophylaxis by hygienists for up to 45 minutes. A clinician performed blinded pre- and post-prophylaxis evaluations for stain, plaque and debris. A matched pairs t-test determined significant differences (P < .05) between groups. Significantly less stain, plaque and debris remained following use of the disposable vs. the autoclavable angle.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-1997 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.