Comparison of Three Tongue Cleaners for Removing Tongue Coating

Istanbul Kent University30 enrolled

Overview

This randomised three-period crossover study compared the effectiveness of three tongue-cleaning devices - a bristled tongue brush, a plastic tongue scraper and a metal tongue scraper - in removing tongue biofilm. Thirty healthy volunteers aged 18 to 30 used each device once daily for 14 consecutive days, with 7-day washout periods between devices during which no tongue cleaning was performed. Tongue biofilm was measured objectively by Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence-Digital (QLF-D) imaging, alongside the visual Tongue Coating Index, salivary pH, and participant-reported acceptability including gag reflex.

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

PREVENTION

Masking

NONE

Enrollment

Conditions

Tongue Coating Oral Biofilm Oral Hygiene Dental Plaque

Bristled tongue brushDEVICE

Over-the-counter tongue brush with a bristled cleaning surface (R.O.C.S. Pro Lingua, Moscow, Russia). Participants used the device once daily for 14 consecutive days, performing a single-directional sweeping motion from the posterior vallate papillae to the anterior tip of the tongue dorsum, using gentle self-regulated pressure sufficient to alter tissue curvature without causing mucosal discomfort.

Plastic tongue scraperDEVICE

Over-the-counter smooth plastic tongue scraper (Pearldent, DentaRAM, Istanbul, Türkiye). Participants used the device once daily for 14 consecutive days, performing a single-directional sweeping motion from the posterior vallate papillae to the anterior tip of the tongue dorsum, using gentle self-regulated pressure sufficient to alter tissue curvature without causing mucosal discomfort.

Metal tongue scraperDEVICE

Over-the-counter rigid metal tongue scraper (Glimo, Haltron, Istanbul, Türkiye). Participants used the device once daily for 14 consecutive days, performing a single-directional sweeping motion from the posterior vallate papillae to the anterior tip of the tongue dorsum, using gentle self-regulated pressure sufficient to alter tissue curvature without causing mucosal discomfort.

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 18 YearsMax age: 30 YearsHealthy volunteers:

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * Healthy volunteers aged 18 to 25 years * No professional dental cleaning within the previous two weeks * Willing to maintain usual toothbrushing and interdental hygiene practices throughout the study period Exclusion Criteria: * -History of significant systemic disease (e.g. diabetes mellitus, immune disorders) * Clinical salivary gland dysfunction or self-reported xerostomia * Active oral or mucosal infection (e.g. severe periodontitis, extensive caries) * Active mucosal lesions * Fixed orthodontic appliances * Conditions predisposing to severe gagging beyond normal clinical sensitivity * Use of topical or systemic antimicrobials or antibiotics within the previous month

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Change From Baseline in Maximum Fluorescence Loss (Delta F Max) of Tongue Dorsum Biofilm Assessed by Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence-Digital (QLF-D) Imaging

Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Day 7 and Day 14 of each 14-day intervention period