Role of Oral Prophylaxis with the Use of Erich Arch Bars: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Materials and Methods: Patients were divided into two groups, Group A and Group B depending on the treatment plan indicated. In Group A, 50 patients were treated with closed reduction and IMF was kept for 4-6 weeks. In Group B, 50 patients treated with open reduction and internal fi xation on Champy’s line of osteosynthesis under general anesthesia and the arch bar was kept for 10 days. Half of the subjects of each group received the oral prophylaxis at the time of arch bar removal (Group A1 and Group B1). The patients were examined for injury to gums and cheek, avulsion of teeth and wire injuries to the operator and assistant including needle stick injuries, perforation of gloves, fetid odor, coated tongue, iatrogenic injury to adjacent teeth, orthodontic movement of teeth, ischemic necrosis of the periodontium and mucosa, oral hygiene index simplifi ed, Papillary bleeding index, and Russel periodontal index. Results: Orthodontic tooth movement, iatrogenic injury to adjacent teeth and ischemic necrosis of the periodontium and mucosa was reported with no statistical signifi cant difference between groups and subgroups. There was a statistical signifi cant difference in oral hygiene index-simplifi ed, papillary bleeding index and Russel periodontal index between the patients in Group A1 and A2 and also between Group B1 and B2. Conclusion: As per the observations of this study all the patients with arch bars suffer from gingival and periodontal injuries, so it is recommended that oral prophylaxis after removal of arch bar should always be done for early recovery of gingival and periodontal recovery.