Self CleaningEarly Phase 1NCT03601585
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Fibrous Foods, Sugar-free Gomes and Rolly Brush® in the Dental Biofilm Removal
A Early Phase 1 study testing Comparison of dental biofilm removal. in people with Self Cleaning, run by Federal University of São Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
Trial summary
The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of three methods for removal of dental biofilm when compared to dental toothbrushing control. Twenty patients were diagnosed and randomized into four groups according to the method tested: 1) apple 2) Rolly Brush 3) chewing gum and 4) brushing control. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 26 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Self Cleaning
- What is being tested?
- Comparison of dental biofilm removal.
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBrazil
- Study dates
- 15 Mar 2018to 19 Jun 2018
- Phase
- Early Phase 1
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 26 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Good periodontal health
- Minimum of eight occlusal surfaces of premolars and molars hygienic
Who cannot join
- Less than eight occlusal surfaces
- Use of orthodontic appliance
- Use of dental prosthesis
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Brazil1 site
Periodontics Clinic, Department of Dentistry
Diamantina, Minas Gerais, 39100000
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Fibrous Foods, Sugar-free Gomes and Rolly Brush® in the Dental Biofilm Removal: A Randomized, Double Masked Clinical Trial
The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of three methods for removal of dental biofilm when compared to dental toothbrushing control. Twenty patients were diagnosed and randomized into four groups according to the method tested: 1) apple 2) Rolly Brush 3) chewing gum and 4) brushing control. Subjects were evaluated four times according to the method used. All were evaluated before performing any method and after using each of the four methods separately. The patient's evaluation interval was 24 hours between the use of the methods. In the first stage, they underwent a clinical examination in which the needs of supragingival scraping or definitive restorations and prophylaxis were detected. After this step, all methods of oral hygiene and the consumption of fibrous foods and chewing gum were suspended for twenty-four hours. In the second stage, with a minimum of twenty-four hours after the first, volunteers received approximately 10 ml of basic fucsin to perform a mouthwash. The dental examination was then carried out for measurement on each dental surface and the plaque index was recorded on each surface. In the latter, four evaluations were performed with at least a 24-hour interval until the patients used the four methods
- Conditions
- Self Cleaning
- Being tested
- Comparison of dental biofilm removal.
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Comparison of dental biofilm removal.Device
Comparison of the use of 4 methods for dental biofilm removal
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Rolly Brush | Experimental | Chew for 1 minute Receives: Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal. |
| Chewing gum | Experimental | Chew for 1 minute Receives: Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal. |
| Apple | Experimental | Chew for 1 minute Receives: Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal. |
| Brush | Active comparator | brush for 1 minute Receives: Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Plaque index
Comparison of the Quigley-Hein plaque index between the following groups: rolly brush, chewing gum, a, apple, brush.
Measured: 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Jul 2018
- Study start15 Mar 2018
- Primary completion19 Jun 2018
- Study completion19 Jun 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Self CleaningStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Early Phase 1
- Primary purpose
- Device feasibility
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of São Paulo
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Olga Flecha, Federal University of São Paulo
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03601585
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- self-cleaning
- Status last verified
- Jul 2018
- First submitted
- 10 Jul 2018
- Last updated
- 26 Jul 2018
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Jul 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Fibrous Foods, Sugar-free Gomes and Rolly Brush® in the Dental Biofilm Removal: A Randomized, Double Masked Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03601585
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- self-cleaning
- Conditions
- Self Cleaning
- Phase
- Early Phase 1
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of São PauloUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 19 Jun 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 19 Jun 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Jul 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of three methods for removal of dental biofilm when compared to dental toothbrushing control. Twenty patients were diagnosed and randomized into four groups according to the method tested: 1) apple 2) Rolly Brush 3) chewing gum and 4) brushing control. Subjects were evaluated four times according to the method used. All were evaluated before performing any method and after using each of the four methods separately. The patient's evaluation interval was 24 hours between the use of the methods. In the first stage, they underwent a clinical examination in which the needs of supragingival scraping or definitive restorations and prophylaxis were detected. After this step, all methods of oral hygiene and the consumption of fibrous foods and chewing gum were suspended for twenty-four hours. In the second stage, with a minimum of twenty-four hours after the first, volunteers received approximately 10 ml of basic fucsin to perform a mouthwash. The dental examination was then carried out for measurement on each dental surface and the plaque index was recorded on each surface. In the latter, four evaluations were performed with at least a 24-hour interval until the patients used the four methods
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Device feasibility
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Rolly Brush | Experimental | Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal.Chew for 1 minute |
| Chewing gum | Experimental | Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal.Chew for 1 minute |
| Apple | Experimental | Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal.Chew for 1 minute |
| Brush | Active comparator | Device: Comparison of dental biofilm removal.brush for 1 minute |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 26 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Good periodontal health
- Minimum of eight occlusal surfaces of premolars and molars hygienic
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Less than eight occlusal surfaces
- Use of orthodontic appliance
- Use of dental prosthesis
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Comparison of dental biofilm removal.Comparison of the use of 4 methods for dental biofilm removal | Device | Apple, Brush, Chewing gum, Rolly Brush |
Primary outcome
Plaque index
Time frame: 3 months
Comparison of the Quigley-Hein plaque index between the following groups: rolly brush, chewing gum, a, apple, brush.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Jul 2018.
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Early Phase 1 study testing Comparison of dental biofilm removal. in people with Self Cleaning, run by Federal University of São Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Jul 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Brazil. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Early Phase 1 (sometimes called Phase 0) studies give a very small amount of a treatment to a few people, mainly to see how the body handles it.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Plaque index (time frame: 3 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Jul 2018; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.