Table 4.
Subjectively assessed oral cleanliness at follow up
| 6-month group | 12-month group | 24-month group | Statistical test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level of oral cleanlinessd (N = 307) |
|
|
|
Kruskal- |
| 1 (Least clean) |
0 |
2 (2.0) |
3 (3.0) |
Wallis Test |
| 2 |
9 (8.4) |
3 (3.0) |
12 (12.0) |
|
| 3 |
42 (39.2) |
48 (48.0) |
55 (55.0) |
P = 0.004 |
| 4 |
51 (47.7) |
43 (43.0) |
23 (25.0) |
|
| 5 (Cleanest) |
5 (4.7) |
4 (4.0) |
5 (5.0) |
|
| 'High’e level of oral cleanliness at follow-up (N = 307) |
|
|
|
Χ2 test |
| N (%) scoring 'High’ |
56 (52.3) |
47 (47.0) |
30 (30.0) |
P = 0.003 |
| Complete dataset analysis (N = 307) | ||||
| Odds Ratio from Logistic regression |
1.00 |
0.95 |
0.40 |
- |
| (95% CI) for follow up adjusted for baseline high level of oral cleanliness |
|
(0.53, 1.70) |
(0.22, 0.74) |
|
| Multiple imputation (ITT) analysis (N = 368) | ||||
| Odds Ratio from Logistic regression |
1.00 |
0.94 |
0.39 |
- |
| (95% CI) for follow up adjusted for baseline high level of oral cleanliness | (0.53, 1.66) | (0.21, 0.73) | ||
d Assessed by asking participant, “How clean does your mouth feel on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is the least clean you could imagine and 5 is the cleanest you could imagine?”.
e'High’ level of oral cleanliness is defined as a participant reporting a score of 4 or 5.