액상형과 정제형 치면세균막 착색제의 착색 능력 비교 = Comparison of the staining ability of liquid-type and tablet-type dental plaque disclosing agents

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Objectives: To compare the staining ability of liquid- and tablet-type dental plaque disclosingagents (PDAs) that contain identical dye components, using quantitative clinical indices and qualitative expert evaluations to identify differences attributable to characteristics of the formulation.
Methods: Data were obtained through a clinical trial conducted between April and June 2023, involving 40 participants aged ≥20 years (PNU IRB/2023_22_HR). Liquid-type PDA (2ToneTM, YoungDental) and tablet-type PDA (PlaqSearchTM, Tepe) were applied to six predetermined tooth surfaces.
Plaque staining ability was quantitatively assessed using the Patient Hygiene Performance (PHP)index, based on intraoral photographs. For qualitative assessment, three experts independentlyevaluated paired images and selected those that demonstrated superior plaque disclosure. Homogeneity tests were performed to assess inter-examiner agreement, and goodness-of-fit testswere performed to analyze differences according to tooth surface.
Results: The PHP index analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in plaque staining ability between liquid- and tablet-type PDAs across all tooth surfaces (P<0.05). In particular, the liquidtype PDA had significantly superior staining on the buccal surfaces of the maxillary first molars. Theresponse distributions among the expert evaluators were homogeneous (P>0.05). Goodness-offit testing identified a statistically significant preference for liquid-type PDA on the buccal surface ofthe maxillary right first molar (P<0.05).
Conclusions: Liquid-type PDAs had superior plaque staining ability on the buccal surfaces of maxillary first molars, compared with tablet-type PDAs. These differences appear to be related to variations in methods of application rather than superiority of the formulation. When tablet-type PDAsare used for self-care, appropriate instruction on the application technique is necessary to ensureuniform staining on surfaces with limited tongue access. non-alcoholic beer (Cass 0.0), lemon flavored non-alcoholic beer (Cass lemon squeeze 0.0), Coca-cola, and bottled water. The pH of all beverages was measured, followed by titratable acidity calculations to pH 5.5 and pH 7.0. Bovine enamel samples were immersed in each beverage and changes in surface microhardness were as sessed. Surface alterations were observed using scanning electron microscopy. Results: Lemon-flavored non-alcoholic beer had the lowest pH and highest titratable acidity, caus ing enamel microhardness reduction and surface demineralization comparable to those of Coca cola. Regular and non-alcoholic beers caused relatively mild erosion; however, a gradual reduction in microhardness was observed over time. Enamel microhardness and surface demineralization of samples immersed in non-alcoholic beer were significantly different compared with those im mersed in bottled water. Conclusions: Non-alcoholic beer, particularly lemon-flavored products with a lower pH, erode enamel, indicating the necessity for dietary guidance to minimize the risk. Beverage manufactur ers should consider acidity and buffering capacity to assist in reducing the erosive potential of their products.