Research on triangular woodsticks compared with floss and interdental brush
Below are two systematic reviews of all
literature on the efficacy of triangular dental woodsticks. The conclusion out of seven
publications with controlled randomised clinical trials was that woodsticks do clearly reduce
A systematic review in 2008 of all
literature on the efficacy of floss (link here) comes
to the conclusion: "dental flossing provides no benefit above and beyond
toothbrushing on removing plaque and reducing gingivitis"
A systematic review in
2008 of all literature on the effficacy of interdental brushes (link here) comes to the conclusion: "There is no difference in the effect
of interdental brushes on parameters of gingival inflammation as compared to floss. A
suggestion for further research can be to design new IDB with a more appropriate form for better
adaptation to the interdental space. This could for instance be a triangular form which is commonly
used for woodsticks and has proven for this oral hygiene product to be the most
Do woodsticks work?
Unit of Periodontology, University College London Eastman Dental Institute, London, UK.
Medline and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were used to find relevant studies.
Studies were screened independently by two reviewers. Randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical
trials were selected if they were conducted in individuals of over 18 years of age who were in good general
health, and which used plaque, bleeding or gingivitis as outcome measures. Case reports, letters, and narrative
or historical reviews were excluded and only English-language papers were considered.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:
Because of the heterogeneity of the studies' designs, a qualitative summary was presented.
Seven publications describing eight clinical experiments met the inclusion criteria. The improvement in
gingival health observed in the studies represented a significant reduction of bleeding realised by the use of
triangular woodsticks. None of the studies that scored plaque demonstrated any significant advantage of the use
of woodsticks over alternative methods of plaque removal in people who had gingivitis.
The evidence from clinical controlled trials shows that woodsticks do not have an additional effect on visible
interdental plaque, but do, however, help improve interdental gingival inflammation.
The efficacy of woodsticks on plaque and gingival inflammation: a systematic review.
Department of Periodontology, Academic Centre of Dentistry Amsterdam, Louwesweg 1, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
To review the literature on whether a hand-held triangular woodstick, as compared with no adjunct or other
interdental cleaning device in addition to daily toothbrushing, can improve clinical parameters of gingival
MATERIAL AND METHODS:
MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched through February 2008 to
identify appropriate studies. Plaque and gingivitis were selected as outcome variables.
Independent screening of the titles and abstracts of 181 MEDLINE and 65 CENTRAL papers yielded seven
publications with eight clinical experiments that met the eligibility criteria. The improvement in gingival
health, as observed in seven studies, represents a significant incremental benefit realized by the use of
triangular woodsticks. None of the studies that scored plaque demonstrated any significant advantage to the use
of woodsticks, as opposed to alternative methods, in gingivitis patients.
Evidence from controlled trials, most of which were also randomized, shows that woodsticks do not have an
additional effect on visible interdental plaque or gingival index, but do, however, provide an improvement in
interdental gingival inflammation by reducing the bleeding tendency.