Claudia Barthel

Publications of Claudia Barthel

• Association between oral health-related and general health-related quality of life in subjects attending dental offices in Germany.

  Authors: Stefan Zimmer, Nora Bergmann, Ebtehal Gabrun, Claudia Barthel, Wolfgang Raab, Jens-Ulrich Rüffer

  Journal of public health dentistry. 12/2009;

  Objectives: To evaluate the GHRQoL and OHRQoL of patients attending dental offices in Germany and to determine correlation coefficients between SF (Short Form)-12 and OHIP (Oral Health ImpactObjectives: To evaluate the GHRQoL and OHRQoL of patients attending dental offices in Germany and to determine correlation coefficients between SF (Short Form)-12 and OHIP (Oral Health Impact Profile)-14 scores. Methods: A total of 10,342 dental offices were randomly selected. Each of the 1,113 that consented to participate received 20 questionnaires to be filled in by a convenience sample of the patients. The questionnaire included the OHIP-14-form for OHRQoL as well as the SF-12-form for GHRQoL. Results: A total of 12,392 completed questionnaires were analyzed. The mean age of the participants (64.9 percent female, 35.1 percent male) was 44.25 years. The mean summary score of OHIP-14 was 6.30 (SD 7.46). The mean physical component summary scale (PCS) of the SF-12 was 51.15 (SD 7.23) and the mental component summary scale (MCS) was 50.17 (SD 8.55). The variance of PCS and MCS could be explained to 10 percent each by oral health-related quality of life (r(2) = 0.095 and 0.101, P < 0.001). Conclusion: OHRQoL is considerably related to GHRQoL.

• Clinical efficacy of flossing versus use of antimicrobial rinses.

  Authors: Stefan Zimmer, Claudia Kolbe, Gerrit Kaiser, Tracy Krage, Michelle Ommerborn, Claudia Barthel

  Journal of periodontology. 08/2006; 77(8):1380-5.

  BACKGROUND: Dental floss is only used by a small part of the population on a daily basis. Therefore, an easy, applicable alternative is needed. This alternative could be a mouthrinse withBACKGROUND: Dental floss is only used by a small part of the population on a daily basis. Therefore, an easy, applicable alternative is needed. This alternative could be a mouthrinse with antimicrobial activity for daily use. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of two mouthrinses in reducing interdental plaque and gingivitis compared to dental floss. METHODS: A total of 156 healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to the following groups: 1) toothbrushing and rinsing (0.06% chlorhexidine and 0.025% fluoride); 2) toothbrushing and rinsing (0.1% cetylpyridiniumchloride and 0.025% fluoride); 3) toothbrushing and flossing; and 4) toothbrushing only (N = 39 subjects in each group). At baseline, the modified proximal plaque index (MPPI) and papillary bleeding index (PBI) were recorded. Thereafter, subjects had to brush in the usual manner during 8 weeks. Additionally, test groups had to rinse once a day (groups 1 and 2: 30 seconds) or to floss (group 3). Eight weeks after baseline, indices were recorded again and improvements were calculated. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Bonferroni test served for statistical analysis. RESULTS: After 8 weeks, reductions for all indices were found in all groups (P <0.05). With respect to the MPPI, mouthrinse groups performed better than the control and floss groups: 1) 0.73; 2) 0.82; 3) 0.40; and 4) 0.32 (P <0.05). The PBI showed no statistically significant difference between groups: 1) 0.46; 2); 0.50; 3); 0.42; and 4) 0.37. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that, in combination with toothbrushing, daily use of the tested mouthrinses may result in a higher interproximal plaque reduction than daily flossing.

• Efficacy of the Cybersonic in comparison with the Braun 3D Excel and a manual toothbrush.

  Authors: Stefan Zimmer, Juliane Strauss, Mozhgan Bizhang, Tracy Krage, W H-M Raab, Claudia Barthel

  Journal of clinical periodontology. 04/2005; 32(4):360-3.

  OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of two power toothbrushes (Cybersonic and Braun 3D Excel) and one manual brush (Elmex super 29). MATERIAL AND METHODS: After professional toothcleaning 120OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of two power toothbrushes (Cybersonic and Braun 3D Excel) and one manual brush (Elmex super 29). MATERIAL AND METHODS: After professional toothcleaning 120 subjects were randomly assigned to three groups. Four weeks later, at baseline, the Quigley-Hein plaque index (QHI), the modified approximal plaque index (API), and the papillary bleeding index (PBI) were recorded. Thereafter the subjects used the assigned toothbrushes for 8 weeks. Improvements of the indices after 4 and 8 weeks were calculated as medians. Kruskal-Wallis- and Mann-Whitney U-test served for statistical analysis. RESULTS: All indices showed statistically significant reductions for both power toothbrushes which were superior to the manual brush (4 weeks: Cybersonic: API, 0.21; PBI, 0.25; QHI, 0.23; Braun: API, 0.20; PBI, 0.39; QHI, 0.22; Elmex: API, 0.04; PBI, 0.02; QHI, 0.07; 8 weeks: Cybersonic: API, 0.28; PBI, 0.36; QHI, 0.41; Braun: API, 0.36; PBI, 0.61; QHI, 0.35; Elmex: API, 0.03; PBI, 0.10; QHI, 0.08; p<0.001). The Braun was superior to the Cybersonic with respect to API after 8 weeks (p<0.05) and PBI after 4 and 8 weeks (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Cybersonic and Braun 3D Excel may be more efficacious than a manual toothbrush in removing plaque and reducing gingivitis.

• Clinical efficacy of a new sonic/ultrasonic toothbrush.

  Authors: Stefan Zimmer, Vida Nezhat, Mozhgan Bizhang, Rainer Seemann, Claudia Barthel

  Journal of clinical periodontology. 06/2002; 29(6):496-500.

  OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Ultra Sonex Ultima(R) in comparison with a conventional manual toothbrush. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In all, 64 healthyOBJECTIVES: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Ultra Sonex Ultima(R) in comparison with a conventional manual toothbrush. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In all, 64 healthy volunteers (32 females, 32 males) took part in the parallel-design treatment-blind study. After a screening examination and stratification by age, sex and papillary bleeding index (PBI), the participants were randomly assigned to two groups with 32 subjects each. Four weeks later, the Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein plaque index (PI), the approximal plaque index (API), and the PBI were recorded at baseline. Four and 8 weeks after baseline, the indices were recorded again. RESULTS: During the study period of 8 weeks, the API showed no difference between the manual and the electric toothbrush. For the median PI, a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) was found after 4 (manual: 2.16 vs. electric: 1.34) and 8 weeks (1.96 vs. 0.92). After 4 weeks, the median PBI was 0.75 for the manual and 0.43 for the electric brush (p < 0.01). The values after 8 weeks were 0.63 (manual) and 0.29 (electric, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Ultra Sonex Ultima may be more efficacious than manual toothbrushes in removing plaque and preventing gingivitis in patients without severe periodontal disease.