|
The
effect of oral irrigation with a
magnetic water treatment device on plaque and calculus.
J.
Clin. Periodontal 1993: 20: 314 - 317. Copyright
Munksgaard, 1993.
(Condensed Version)
Abstract.
Calculus
formation on tooth surfaces is analogous to the
formation of lime and scale deposits in plumbing.
Magnetic water devices have been shown to significantly
reduce scale deposits in industry: therefore an
oral irrigator with a magnetic water device may
have a similar effect on calculus. To test this
hypothesis, a double blind clinical study was established
using 64 irrigators, 30 of which had their magnetic
devices removed. 54 patients with heavy supragingival
calculus were given irrigators at random after rophylaxis.
Instructions were given to irrigate twice a day,
particularly the lower 6 anterior teeth. The patients
were also told not to floss these 6 teeth which
were to be the study teeth. They were examined after
3 months and measurements were taken of the accretions
adhering to the study teeth. No attempt was made
to determine whether the adhering material was hard
or soft so it must be assumed that at least some
of the measured material was also plaque. The measurements
of the group using an irrigator with a magnetic
device showed a 44% greater reduction in calculus
volume (p < 0.0005) and a 42% greater reduction
in area (p < 0.0001) over the group using an
unmagnetic irrigator. There appears to be a statistically
significant difference in supragingival accretion
volumes between conventional irrigation and using
an irrigator with a magnetic water treatment device.
Adherence
of supra-gingival calculus and its accompanying
bacterial plaque to the surfaces of teeth has been
implicated as a possible factor in initiating periodontal
diseases. Tooth brushing has been universally accepted
as the standard method of oral hygiene to control
the formation of supra-gingival calculus. Standard
oral hygiene procedures have greatly improved dental
health, but periodontal diseases are still common
and pose a tremendous health care expense (Sheiham
1991). Many studies have demonstrated that the use
of irrigation devices may be an effective means
to reach into areas inaccessible to tooth brushing.
The addition of agents such as chlorhexidine and
fluoride have in creased this effectiveness (Flint
et al, 1988, Vignarajah et al,1989, Wikesjo et al,
1989, Landet et al, 1986). Another method of increasing
the effectiveness of irrigation may be through the
use of magnets.
The
application of magnetic water treatment devices
has been used in Eastern Block countries and China
for over twenty-five years (Hibben 1973). Grutsch
& McClintock (1984) demonstrated a positive
corrosion and deposit control by the use of magnetically-treated
water at an AMOCO refinery. Kronenberg (1985) described
the observations of reduced formation of new hard
lime scale deposits and the elimination of old lime
scale deposits. A Baylor research team (McAtec et
al,1985) under contract from the American Petroleum
Institute concluded that "the passage of conducting
solutions (tap water) through a magnetic treatment
device generates voltages and currents which result
in an electrolysis reaction, producing nucleation
centers that favor precipitation of scaling salts
in the bulk of the solution rather than on the walls
of plumbing." Certain theories have been proposed
to explain mechanisms of adherence of calculus.
It has been shown that amphipatic substances change
the charge of the tooth surfaces, which can effect
the attachment of bacteria (Krasse l9m. Ca++ and
P04 - ions are concentrated on hydrated tooth surfaces
(Stem Layer) which are covered by a protein pellicle.
Rolla (1977) stated "that gram positive bacteria
are negatively charged and these bacteria are the
first colonizers of the negatively charged tooth
surface. The well-known delay (3 - 4 hours) which
may be observed before bacteria colonize teeth may
well be ascribed by the repulsive forces between
the surfaces involved. Divalent cations will reduce
the repulsion and permit the bacteria to approach
the teeth. An adhesion based on some specific interaction
may be the final stage of the electrostatically
mediated approach of the bacteria to the tooth surface."
It can be hypothesized that this adhesive interaction
is similar to the naturally occurring phenomenon
of adherence of particulate matter to any hard surface
in an aquatic environment and that this adherence
may be adversely affected by magnetic devices. Recently,
an oral irrigator with a magnetic device was manufactured.
Unpublished preliminary clinical pilot studies have
indicated positive results (Watt 1987, Vollmer &
Barger 1988) along with numerous ancedotal reports
by several dental clinicians. Therefore a double-blind
clinical trial was established to test this hypothesis.
Material
and Methods
64
irrigation units were provided by the manufacturer,
30 of which had their magnetic devices removed.
The units were coded and the examiner did not know
which units had magnetic devices and which did not.
54 patients were selected because they formed heavy
calculus and they had been successfully treated
for periodontal disease. They were currently being
seen on a 2 - 4 month recall for maintenance. All
patients received a thorough scaling and prophylaxis
and had the tooth surfaces carefully examined by
2 clinicians. They were instructed in the use of
the assigned irrigator, concentrating on a thorough
lavage of the lower 6 anterior teeth 2 x a day.
These 6 teeth were not to be flossed, but the patients
were to continue normal maintenance procedures otherwise.
They were appointed for a recall visit in 3 months.
At the recall visit, the patients were questioned
about their compliance. If the patients stated that
they were unable to perform the irrigation properly
for more than 14 days, they were removed from the
study. Three patients were removed for this reason.
Two patients reported that they had flossed the
study teeth. 7 patients reported irrigator malfunction
and two patients were traveling and could not schedule
an appointment within 3 weeks after their 3-month
period. A total of 14 patients were removed from
the study. For the remaining patients, the study
teeth were stained with green food coloring and
the same examiner performed all evaluations. The
teeth were first air dried and the adhering residues
were measured by comparing their height from the
gingival margin and thickness to a "Michigan
O" periodontal probe. Measurements were taken
in 6 places on each tooth (DF, F, MF, ML, L, and
DL).
The
majority of the adhering residue was most likely
calculus but, because no attempts were made to remove
plaque and the residues were not probed to determine
if they were hard or soft, it seems most appropriate
to state that the residues were both plaque and
calculus. The value for the height measurement was
confined to 3 mm from the gingival sulcus. Thus
by dividing the tooth surface at each of the 6 measurement
sites into 3 regions of 1 mm height each, altogether
there were 18 areas on each tooth at which thickness
could be measured. For each area, the thickness
measurement was recorded using the following code:
0.5 mm = 1,1 mm = 2,1+ mm = 3. The sum of the 18
thickness codes represents an empirical measurement
which is correlated to the total volume of calculus
and plaque on a tooth, and by adding together the
individual tooth volume measurements an over all
volume score was obtained for each patient. An empirical
score representing the total tooth area covered
by calculus and plaque was also recorded. This score
was obtained by counting the number of 1 mm high
tooth regions (out of a possible total of 108) that
had at least 0.5 mm thick covering of calculus and
plaque.
Results
The
observed distributions of the volume measurements
suggests that the presence of the magnetic device
in irrigators causes a distributional shift in the
amount of calculus and plaque formed. There seems
to be an overall tendency for lower volume scores
among the magnetic water group. Smaller values for
the sample mean (30.89 versus 55.55, x reduction
of 44%) and the sample median (28 versus 42, a reduction
of 33.3%) serve to summarize the difference in aver
age values for the two distributions.
Graphic
results indicate a decreased variability in the
volume scores for the patients who had used the
irrigators furnished with magnets. This observation
is supported by the fact that the magnetic water
group has both a smaller sample standard deviation
(16.9 versus 26.9) and a smaller interquartile range
(9.75 versus 42) than the unmagnetized water group.
The
combined effect of reductions in both the location
of central tendency and the amount of distribution
spread which are apparently due to the treatment
effect of the magnetized water is a propensity to
obtain a decreased proportion of patients having
large amounts of calculus and plaque when compared
to the amount which result when unmagnetized water
is utilized. It is noteworthy that 9 of the 22 patients
who used unmagnetized irrigators had volume scores
of 62 or greater, while only one patient from the
magnetized water group had a score that high. Formally,
it seems best to describe the distributional shift
by stating that the distributions for the magnetized
water group appear to be stochastically smaller
than the distributions of the unmagnetized group
(which implies a smaller distribution mean). The
Mann-Whitney U-test can be used to show that the
observed distributional shift is statistically significant,
and in this case the data yields the highly significant
re result p < 0.0005. The effect of the magnets
in the irrigators can also be assessed by comparing
the area scores for the calculus and plaque measured
for the two groups. A thorough analysis of the data
yields results analogous to those obtained from
the volume measurements. Overall, the distribution
of area scores for the magnetized water group is
stochastically smaller than the distribution of
scores for the unmagnetized water group (p <
0.0001 by the Mann-Whitney U-test). The magnitude
of the distribution shift can be summarized by a
comparison of the sample means and the sample standard
deviations. The mean of the eighteen area scores
for the magnetized water group (26.50) is 42% smaller
than the mean for the 22 area scores for the unmagnetized
water group (62.32), and a reduction in the standard
deviation is also observed (10.4 versus 18.35).
Discussion
On
the basis of the proceeding statistical analysis
one can conclude that a magnetic device properly
attached to an oral irrigator appears to greatly
reduce the formation of supra-gingival calculus
and its accompanying plaque. This author is unaware
of any other similar studies in the dental literature
and, if other independent studies result in findings
similar to those reported here, it is logical to
assume that such an irrigator would then be of extreme
benefit to a self-care oral hygiene regime.
One
can speculate that the probable mode of action of
magnetically treated water affects the Ca++ and
PO4- - ions in the stern layer by bringing these
ions closer together, thus reducing their activity.
This could, in turn, reduce the effect of free divalent
cations in mediating attachment. Another possibility
is that the amount of free divalent cations is reduced
because the magnetized water encourages their precipitation.
An excellent research question would be if the addition
of chemical agents, such as salt solutions, to the
irrigation solution could enhance or hinder the
effect on calculus. Further, long-term studies need
to be completed to assure that there are no side
effects such as reduced hydration of the tooth surfaces
which may be detrimental to tooth vitality. However,
such side effects are highly unlikely. Article References
follow below.
References
Flint,
D. J., Gerdis, G., Pearson, B.S. & Collier,
C.M. (1988) Use of stannous fluoride irrigation
in periodontal therapy. Journal of General Dentistry
36.4, 334-336.
Grutsch,
J. F., McClintock, J. W. (1984) Corrosion and deposit
control in alkaline cooling water using magnetic
water treatment at AMOCO's largest refinery. Corrosion
84, no. 330 (available from author).
Hibben,
S.O. (1973) Magnetic treatment of water, National
Technical Information Service, no. 1622-4. Krasse,
B. (1977) Adherence of bacteriato tooth surfaces.
Swedish Dental Journal I, 253-259.
Kronenberg,K.J.(1985)
Magnetic water treatment demystified. Magnets Magazine
6-27.
Lander,
P. E., Newcomb, G. M., Seymour, G.J. & Powell,
R.N. (1986) The antimicrobial and clinical effects
of a single subgingival irrigation of chlorhexidine
in advanced periodontallesions. Journal of Clinical
Periodontology 13, 74-80.
McAtee,
J. L., Darling, R. E., Parker, D. H. (1985) Evaluation
of the principles of magnetic water treatment. American
Petroleum Institute Publication 960 (available from
American Petroleum Institute, Washington D.C.).
Rolla,
G. (1977) Formation of dental integuments - some
basic chemical considerations. Swedish Dental Journal
I,241-251.
Sheiham,A.
(1991)Public health aspects of periodontal diseases
in Europe. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 18,
362, 369.
Vignsrajah,
S., Newman, H. N. & Bulman, J. (1989) Pulsated
jet subgingival irrigation with 0.1% chlorhexidine,
simplified oral hygiene and chronic periodontitis.
Journal of Clinical Periodontology 16, 365-370.
Vollmer,
D. & Barger, B. (1988) A 6 patient clinical
trial of hydro floss irrigator. Preliminary report
for Magna Marketing, Inc. (Available from HydroFloss,
Inc. Birmingham, Alabama).
Wat,
D. L. (1987)5-patient clinical trial on effects
of magnetically treated water on dental plaque and
calculus. A preliminary report for Magna Marketing,
Inc. (Available from author).
Wikesjo,
U. M. E., Reynolds, M. S., Christersson, L. A.,
Zambon, J. J. & Genco, R. J. (1989) Effects
of subgingival irrigation on A. actinomycetemcomitans.
Journal of Clinical Periodontology 16, 116-119.
|