Skip to content

Video vs. Model-Based Oral Hygiene Instruction in Gingivitis Patients

Comparison of Video-Based Versus Model-Based Oral Hygiene Instruction on Clinical Outcomes and the Predictive Role of Self-Efficacy in Gingivitis Patients: A Single-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07706049
Enrollment
80
Registered
2026-07-15
Start date
2024-06-01
Completion date
2025-02-01
Last updated
2026-09-10

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Gingivitis, Gingivitis and Periodontal Diseases

Keywords

Gingivitis, oral hyigene instructions, oral health realted self efficiacy

Brief summary

This randomized, single-blind clinical trial aims to evaluate the short-term effectiveness of two different oral hygiene instruction (OHI) methods-video-assisted instruction versus traditional 3D model demonstration-on periodontal clinical parameters in patients diagnosed with gingivitis. A critical secondary objective of this study is to investigate the predictive role of patients' baseline Oral Hygiene-Related Self-Efficacy (OHSE) on the extent of clinical healing, and to assess changes in patient-reported subjective gingival health using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A total of 80 patients undergoing standard Phase 1 periodontal therapy (scaling and root planing) are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the video instruction group or the model instruction group. Periodontal clinical indices, including Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI), Probing Depth (PD), and Bleeding on Probing (BOP), alongside patient-reported outcomes, are recorded at baseline and at a three-month follow-up by a blinded examiner. The primary hypothesis is that video-based instruction is non-inferior to conventional model-based instruction in improving clinical parameters. Furthermore, the study hypothesizes that a patient's baseline self-efficacy level-independent of the educational method received-significantly predicts the reduction in periodontal inflammation and bleeding scores.

Detailed description

Background and Rationale Gingivitis is a reversible inflammatory condition of the gingival tissues caused by the accumulation of dental plaque. The gold standard for its prevention and treatment is professional mechanical plaque removal (Phase 1 periodontal therapy) combined with effective, daily supragingival plaque control by the patient. However, maintaining long-term patient compliance and motivation remains a significant clinical challenge. Traditionally, oral hygiene instruction (OHI) involves verbal guidance and practical demonstration of brushing and interdental cleaning techniques on 3D dental models. With the integration of digital health technologies, video-based educational tools have emerged as a viable alternative. Video instructions offer standardized content and optimize the clinician's chair-time, which is highly valuable in busy clinical settings. While clinical indices objectively measure disease severity, contemporary periodontal care increasingly recognizes the crucial role of psychological and behavioral factors in treatment success. Oral hygiene-related self-efficacy (OHSE)-a patient's belief in their ability to maintain oral care habits even under taxing situations-is a key cognitive determinant of behavior change. Therefore, evaluating clinical outcomes in conjunction with OHSE and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) provides a more comprehensive understanding of periodontal healing dynamics. Study Objectives The primary objective of this study is to compare the short-term clinical efficacy of video-based versus model-based OHI delivered as an adjunct to Phase 1 periodontal treatment in patients with gingivitis. The secondary objective is to evaluate whether patients' baseline OHSE scores predict the amount of clinical improvement (reductions in Plaque Index and Bleeding on Probing) and to assess changes in self-reported gingival symptoms using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Methodology and Study Design This study is designed as a prospective, randomized, single-blind, parallel-group clinical trial conducted at Ankara University Faculty of Dentistry. The trial enrolls 80 eligible patients diagnosed with plaque-induced gingivitis, characterized by a whole-mouth average Gingival Index (GI) \> 2.0 and no probing depths \> 4 mm. Patients with a history of systemic diseases affecting periodontal tissues, current smokers, and those who received antibiotic therapy within the last 3 months are excluded. Clinical and Behavioral Assessments Prior to any intervention (Baseline - T0), a blinded examiner assesses the periodontal health of the participants using the Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI), Probing Depth (PD), and Bleeding on Probing (BOP) at six sites per tooth. Following the clinical examination, patients complete a validated Oral Hygiene-Related Self-Efficacy (OHSE) questionnaire, which evaluates their confidence in performing toothbrushing, interdental cleaning, and regular dental visits under various psychological barriers. Additionally, patients rate their subjective gingival symptoms (e.g., bleeding, swelling, bad breath) using a 10-point VAS. Intervention Following baseline assessments, all patients receive standard Phase 1 periodontal treatment, consisting of full-mouth supragingival and subgingival scaling and polishing using ultrasonic instruments and hand curettes. Immediately after the mechanical therapy, patients are randomly allocated to one of two groups (1:1 ratio): Video Group: Patients receive a digital link to a standardized instructional video demonstrating proper toothbrushing and interdental cleaning techniques. Model Group: Patients receive one-on-one practical oral hygiene instruction demonstrated by a clinician on a 3D dental model. Follow-up and Statistical Analysis Patients are recalled at 3 month (T1) post-intervention. The same blinded examiner repeats all clinical measurements (PI, GI, PD, BOP) and patients re-evaluate their subjective gingival symptoms (VAS). Statistical analyses will be performed to assess within-group and between-group variations. The comparison of clinical improvement amounts (Δ T0 - T1) between the Video and Model groups will be conducted using Independent Samples t-tests and Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA), adjusting for baseline clinical values and initial OHSE scores. Correlation analyses will be employed to examine the predictive relationship between baseline OHSE subsets (particularly interdental cleaning self-efficacy) and objective reductions in periodontal inflammation.

Interventions

Patients are provided with a digital link to a standardized, audio-visual instructional video. The video comprehensively demonstrates proper toothbrushing and interdental cleaning techniques. Patients are instructed to watch the video and use it as a reference to reinforce their daily oral home care routine.

A clinician provides a one-on-one, hands-on practical demonstration of proper toothbrushing and interdental cleaning techniques. This instruction is delivered interactively using a 3-dimensional physical dental model to guide and educate the patient on their daily oral home care routine.

Sponsors

Ankara University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

Due to the educational and interactive nature of the interventions (watching a video vs. receiving hands-on model demonstration), it is not possible to blind the patients or the care provider (the clinician delivering the instruction). Therefore, masking is strictly limited to the Outcomes Assessor (the clinical examiner), who performs all baseline (T0) and follow-up (T1) periodontal measurements and remains completely unaware of the patients' group allocation throughout the study.

Intervention model description

Following standard Phase 1 periodontal treatment, eligible patients diagnosed with plaque-induced gingivitis are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio into two parallel arms. The experimental group receives a standardized video-based oral hygiene instruction, while the active comparator group receives a conventional clinician-demonstrated instruction on a 3D dental model. Both parallel groups are evaluated at baseline(T0) and at a 3-month(T1) follow-up.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients officially diagnosed with plaque-induced gingivitis. * Patients having an average whole-mouth Gingival Index (GI) score strictly above 2.0 at baseline. * Patients aged between 18 and 65 years. * Patients who have provided written informed consent to participate in the study.

Exclusion criteria

* Individuals with an average whole-mouth Gingival Index (GI) score of 2.0 or below. * Individuals presenting with periodontal pockets deeper than 4 mm in any single area of the mouth. * Individuals who possess fixed prosthetic restorations on any tooth. * Individuals who have received any form of professional periodontal treatment within the last 6 months. * Individuals who currently smoke or use similar tobacco products. * Individuals who have used systemic antibiotics for any medical or dental reason within the last 3 months. * Individuals who are physically or cognitively unable to perform adequate daily oral hygiene practices. * Individuals who have lost 5 or more natural teeth (excluding third molars/wisdom teeth).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Plaque Index (PI)Baseline (T0) and 3-Months Follow-up (T1)The Plaque Index evaluates the level of dental plaque accumulation. Measurements are taken by a blinded examiner at six sites per tooth (mesio-facial, mid-facial, disto-facial, mesio-oral, mid-oral, and disto-oral). The whole-mouth average score is calculated for each patient. A decrease in the score represents an improvement in oral hygiene and plaque control.
Change in Gingival Index (GI)Baseline (T0) and 3-Months Follow-up (T1)The Gingival Index assesses the severity of gingival inflammation. Measurements are recorded by a blinded examiner at six sites per tooth. The whole-mouth average score is calculated. A decrease in the score indicates a reduction in gingival inflammation and clinical improvement.
Change in Bleeding on Probing (BOP) PercentageBaseline (T0) and 3-Months Follow-up (T1)Bleeding on Probing assesses the presence or absence of gingival bleeding stimulated by a periodontal probe. It is evaluated at six sites per tooth. The outcome is calculated as the percentage of bleeding sites relative to the total number of sites evaluated. A decrease in the percentage indicates reduced inflammation and clinical healing.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Patient-Reported Subjective Gingival Health (VAS)Baseline (T0) and 3-Months Follow-up (T1)Patients evaluate their subjective perception of their own gingival health and symptoms (such as bleeding, swelling, or bad breath) using a 10-point Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The scores range from 1 to 10, where 1 indicates "very poor" and 10 indicates "excellent". An increase in the score represents an improvement in the patient's subjective perception of their gingival health.
Baseline Oral Hygiene-Related Self-Efficacy (OHSE) ScoreBaseline (T0)The validated OHSE questionnaire evaluates a patient's internal confidence in performing oral hygiene tasks (toothbrushing, interdental cleaning, and attending dental visits) under taxing situations. It consists of 19 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = "completely confident not to", 4 = "completely confident"). The total score ranges from 19 to 76. Higher scores indicate greater psychological resilience and self-efficacy. This is measured prior to intervention to serve as an independent predictive variable for clinical healing.

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Sep 11, 2026