Table 3.
Mean (standard deviation) total gingival abrasion sites: overall analysis including small (2 ≤ mm), medium (≥3 mm − ≤ 5 mm) and large (>5 mm) lesions; sub-analysis including small (≤2 mm) lesions. Half-mouth scores were performed as described by Bentley & Disney [21]. Overall statistics show no differences between both groups for each visit. Within groups difference (paired sample T tests) were statistical significant within groups for total abrasions and within neither group for small abrasions
| Baseline | Week 4 | Week 8 | Diff (base‐8 weeks) | Statistics within groups 0–8 weeksa | ANCOVAb | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gingival abrasions Overall |
TD ⊖ SLS (N = 58) | 4.72 (5.11) | 5.36 (4.84) | 5.39 (5.29) | −0.67 (5.67) | P = 0.370 | P = 0.706 |
| CD ⊕ SLS (N = 58) | 5.60 (5.32) | 4.03 (4.17) | 5.30 (4.09) | 0.31 (6.32) | P = 0.710 | ||
| P values analysis between groupsc | P = 0.366 | P = 0.116 | P = 0.906 | P = 0.380 | |||
| 95 % CI | −2.80; 1.04 | −0.33; 2.99 | −1.64; 1.84 | −3.20; 1.23 | |||
| Gingival abrasions Small |
TD ⊖ SLS (N = 58) | 4.47 (4.86) | 4.79 (4.43) | 5.19 (5.13) | 0.72 (5.43) | P = 0.315 | P = 0.811 |
| CD ⊕ SLS (N = 58) | 5.10 (4.92) | 3.78 (3.77) | 5.16 (3.93) | 0.05 (5.97) | P = 0.948 | ||
| P values analysis between groupsc | P = 0.484 | P = 0.186 | P = 0.968 | P = 0.527 | |||
| 95 % CI | −2.44; 1.16 | −0.50; 2.53 | −1.65; 1.72 | −1.43; 2.77 | |||
95 % CI 95 % confidence interval
aPaired sample t test
bANCOVA
cIndependent t test