Mechanical and physical properties of dental floss: a comparative cost analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v41n0a2025-75422Keywords:
Comparative study, Costs and cost analysis, Mechanical tests, Oral hygiene.Abstract
The aim of this study was to measure the mechanical and physical properties of 18 commercially available dental flosses produced by global and Brazilian manufacturing and to correlate these parameters with their cost. Eighteen dental flosses available were tested: Bianco Delicare, Colgate, Colgate Menta, Colgate Total, Dauf Oral Care, Hillo, Jade Pro, Johnson and Johnson Essencial, Johnson and Johnson Expansion Plus, Kess, Needs Oral Care, Oral Nexter, Oral-B Essential Floss, Oral-B Pro Saúde, Power Dent Classic Floss, Power Dent Classic Floss Extra Fino, Sanifill Clássico, and Sanifill Infinite. The maximum load (N) and elongation (mm) were measured using a universal testing machine (Instron EL3000). The dental floss width (µm) and filament diameter (µm) were measured using a scanning electron microscope. The cost of each dental floss was correlated with the mechanical and physical properties. The results showed that there was no correlation between the cost of the dental floss and the maximum load (R² = 0.04) or the filament diameter (R² = 0.08). There was a moderate negative correlation between the cost of dental floss and the capacity of elongation (R² = 0.46) and moderate positive correlation between the price and dental floss width (R² = 0.43). It can be concluded that the dental tapes generally cost more per meter and have the lowest elongation capacity. Dental flosses with low cost presented good values for maximum load and elongation, making them suitable for dental hygiene protocols in developing countries.
References
AL-ANSARY, M. A. R. The influence of number of filaments on physical and mechanical characteristics of polyester woven fabrics. Life Science Journal, 2012, 9(3), 79-83. https://www.lifesciencesite.com/lsj/life0903/012_9161life0903_79_83.pdf
BASTANI, P. et al.. What makes inequality in the area of dental and oral health in developing countries? A scoping review. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2021, 19, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-021-00309-0
BOSMA, M. L., et al.. Efficacy of flossing and mouth rinsing regimens on plaque and gingivitis: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Oral Health, 2024, 24(1), 178. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-03924-4
CHEN, M. X. et al.. Global, regional, and national burden of severe periodontitis, 1990–2019: An analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Journal of clinical periodontology, 2021, 48(9), 1165-1188. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13506
CWIK, J. et al.. Plaque reduction and tensile strength evaluations of three dental floss products. American Journal of Dentistry, 2021, 34(3), 123-126.
HUANG, Z., BROADBENT, J. M. and CHOI, J. J. E. Comparison of dental flosses–an investigation of subjective preference and mechanical properties. Biomaterial investigations in dentistry, 2023, 10(1), 2258919. https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2023.2258919
ISO, 28158:2018; Integrated Dental Floss and Handles International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. https://cdn.standards.iteh.ai/samples/69904/ce164ef851e3429ebc26c3b3300ae2e6/ISO-28158-2018.pdf
KUMAR, J., CRALL, J. J. and HOLT, K. Oral Health of Women and Children: Progress, Challenges, and Priorities. Maternal and child health journal, 2023, 27(11), 1930-1942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-023-03757-7
PETERSEN, P. E. The World Oral Health Report 2003: continuous improvement of oral health in the 21st century–the approach of the WHO Global Oral Health Programme. Community Dentistry and oral epidemiology, 2003, 31, 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1046/j..2003.com122.x
REINIGER, A. P. P. et al.. Effectiveness of dental floss in the management of gingival health: A 6-month follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clinical Oral Investigations, 2024, 28(6), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05693-4
ROTELLA, K. et al.. Habits, practices and beliefs regarding floss and mouthrinse among habitual and non-habitual users. American Dental Hygienists' Association, 2022, 96(3), 46-58. https://jdh.adha.org/content/jdenthyg/96/3/46.full.pdf
SHAMSODDIN, E. Dental floss as an adjuvant of the toothbrush helps gingival health. Evidence-Based Dentistry, 2022, 23(3), 94-96. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-022-0818-x
SUPANITAYANON, L., S. et al.. Mechanical and physical properties of various types of dental floss. Key Engineering Materials, 2017, 730, 155-160. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.730.155
XU, X., et al.. Effects of water flossing on gingival inflammation and supragingival plaque microbiota: a 12-week randomized controlled trial. Clinical oral investigations, 2023, 27(8), 4567–4577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05081-4
WORTHINGTON, H. V. et al.. Home use of interdental cleaning devices, in addition to toothbrushing, for preventing and controlling periodontal diseases and dental caries. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2019, (4). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012018.pub2
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Thiago Silva Peres, Izabela Batista Cordeiro, Ianca Daniele Oliveira de Jesus, Roberta de Oliveira Alves, Carlos José Soares, Priscilla Barbosa Ferreira Soares

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.