What Can I Use If I Don’t Have Floss?

Several tools clean between your teeth as effectively as traditional string floss, and some actually outperform it. Interdental brushes, water flossers, rubber-tipped cleaners, floss picks, and even certain antiseptic mouthrinses have all been studied head-to-head against standard floss with respectable results. The honest finding from dental research over the past two decades is that floss is not uniquely irreplaceable. What matters is that you disrupt the bacterial film between teeth on a regular basis, and you have more options for doing that than most people realize.

Interdental Brushes Are the Strongest Alternative

If you had to pick one substitute, interdental brushes would be the best-supported choice. These are tiny, bottle-shaped brushes designed to slide between teeth, and multiple studies have found they remove more plaque than floss does. A systematic review concluded that using interdental brushes alongside toothbrushing removes more plaque than brushing alone, and that they are more effective than floss or wooden sticks for that job.¹ A randomized trial comparing the two found that the interdental brush group improved more than the floss group on every measured outcome at six weeks, and the gap widened further by twelve weeks.²

Another trial specifically tracked plaque scores over six weeks. The interdental brush group started and ended with better numbers, showing a bigger drop in plaque buildup and a larger reduction in pocket depth compared to floss users.³ A Cochrane review, which pools data from multiple trials, found that interdental brushes may reduce plaque more than toothbrushing alone, with evidence at least as strong as that for floss.⁴

The catch is that interdental brushes do not fit everyone’s teeth. If your gaps are tight, especially in the front, the brush may not slide through without forcing it. That is where size selection becomes important, and it can make a real difference in whether the tool works for you. Research on brush sizing found that people were significantly more satisfied and more likely to keep using the brushes when the size was matched to their actual interdental space.⁵ Most interdental brush brands sell variety packs for this reason. Start with the smallest size and work up until you find one that fits snugly without pain.

Water Flossers

Water flossers (sometimes called oral irrigators) blast a thin stream of water between your teeth. They are especially popular with people who find string floss tedious or painful. A systematic review of the evidence found that the majority of studies favored water flossers over dental floss for plaque reduction, and that water flossers were effective at reaching areas string floss struggles with.⁶ One study included in that review reported roughly a 74% reduction in whole-mouth plaque with a water flosser compared to about 58% with string floss.

That said, not every study shows a dramatic gap. One single-use comparison found that both regular floss and a water flosser reduced plaque by about the same amount after one session, with no meaningful difference between them.⁷ The overall picture is that water flossers are at least as good as string floss, and likely a bit better over weeks of regular use, particularly in hard-to-reach spots toward the back of the mouth.

The main downside is cost. A decent countertop water flosser runs anywhere from $40 to $80, while a spool of string floss is a couple of dollars. Portable, battery-powered models are cheaper but may have less water pressure. If money is no object and you simply will not use string floss, a water flosser is a solid investment.

Floss Picks, Powered Flossers, and Handle-Based Tools

Floss picks are those small plastic forks with a short piece of floss stretched between two prongs. They are widely available, cheap, and easier to maneuver one-handed than string floss. For most adults, they get the job done, though they have one limitation: because the floss is held straight rather than curved into a C-shape, they may not hug the contour of each tooth as well as properly used string floss. Still, a floss pick you actually use every day is better than a roll of string floss that sits in the drawer.

Powered flossers take this idea further. One study comparing a powered flosser to three types of traditional string floss (unwaxed, woven, and shred-resistant) found that the powered device removed more plaque in contact areas than two of the three traditional types, and trended toward outperforming the third as well.⁸ Another trial found that an automated flosser resulted in less plaque than manual flossing at both the 15-day and 30-day marks, across all regions of the mouth.⁹

A newer product called GumChucks uses two short handles with a piece of floss stretched between them, mimicking the motion of string floss but without wrapping anything around your fingers. A trial in children with intellectual disabilities found that GumChucks led to greater plaque removal and less gum inflammation compared to traditional string floss, largely because the handle design gave children with limited dexterity better control.¹⁰ That principle applies broadly: any tool that makes interdental cleaning easier for your particular hands will probably give you better results than a tool you struggle with.

Rubber-Tipped Interdental Cleaners

Rubber bristle interdental cleaners, sometimes sold as soft picks, look like tiny rubber Christmas trees you push between your teeth. They are disposable, pocket-sized, and easy to use without a mirror. A systematic review of the evidence found that they performed about as well as interdental brushes and dental floss for reducing plaque and gum inflammation.¹¹ One advantage worth noting: compared to traditional interdental brushes, the rubber cleaners caused fewer gum abrasions and were rated more favorably by the people who used them. If you have sensitive gums that bleed or hurt when you use a wire-core interdental brush, a rubber-tipped option could be gentler while still getting the job done.

Antiseptic Mouthrinses

Mouthwash will not physically dislodge a chunk of food stuck between your molars. But in terms of controlling the bacterial film between teeth, certain antiseptic rinses perform surprisingly well. A six-month trial compared brushing plus an essential-oil mouthrinse (the type sold as Listerine) against brushing plus flossing and found that the mouthrinse group had lower interproximal plaque scores and a bigger reduction in gum inflammation than the floss group.¹² Specifically, the mouthrinse group saw about a 20% plaque reduction compared to roughly 3% in the floss group, and about an 11% reduction in gum inflammation versus about 4% with floss.

Another study found that both chlorhexidine and essential-oil rinses provided gingivitis control “at least as good as” dental floss.¹³ A separate six-month trial comparing essential-oil and chlorhexidine rinses directly found both delivered similar reductions in plaque and gum inflammation.¹⁴

An important caveat: chlorhexidine rinses are prescription-strength in many countries and can stain teeth brown with long-term use. Essential-oil rinses like Listerine are available over the counter and do not stain, though they burn quite a bit. Neither type replaces the mechanical removal of food debris, so a mouthrinse works best when combined with brushing rather than used entirely on its own. But if you are traveling without floss and have access to an antiseptic rinse, it is not nothing. The research suggests it can matter more than many people assume.

When Your Hands Are the Problem

A surprising number of people skip flossing not because they are lazy, but because their hands physically cannot manage it. Arthritis, carpal tunnel, neurological conditions, and age-related stiffness all make it genuinely hard to wrap floss around your fingers and guide it between teeth. Research on patients with rheumatoid arthritis found that reduced manual coordination was associated with greater plaque buildup, and that difficulty performing interdental cleaning was a significant factor.¹⁵

For these situations, the best substitute is the one that demands the least fine motor control. Water flossers require only that you aim a nozzle. Interdental brushes have thicker handles than a strand of floss. Floss picks and GumChucks-style tools eliminate finger-wrapping entirely. Even an antiseptic rinse, which requires no dexterity at all, provides some benefit. The worst outcome is skipping interdental cleaning altogether because the standard tool is too hard to use.

What About People With Braces

Orthodontic brackets and wires make traditional flossing a chore. You have to thread the floss under the wire before you can reach the gumline, which can take several minutes per arch. Water flossers and super floss (a stiffer, threader-equipped floss) have both been tested in this population. A randomized trial of orthodontic patients found that super floss and a water flosser reduced plaque by similar amounts overall, though the water flosser had a slight edge on the hard-to-reach back surfaces of molar teeth.¹⁶ Another trial comparing a water flosser to interdental flossing in orthodontic patients found both produced significant drops in plaque and gingival bleeding, with the water flosser showing a slight, non-significant advantage.¹⁷ If you wear braces and hate threading floss, a water flosser is the most practical alternative.

Ancient Solutions and Chewing Sticks

Humans have been cleaning between their teeth for a long time. Grooves consistent with toothpick use have been found on Neandertal teeth from sites in Spain and France, suggesting that interdental cleaning behavior goes back tens of thousands of years.¹⁸ Even older evidence comes from Upper Paleolithic humans in Southern Italy, whose teeth show interproximal grooves interpreted as the result of habitual toothpick use, probably to relieve sore gums.¹⁹

A more modern version of this tradition is the miswak, a chewing stick made from the Salvadora persica tree, widely used across parts of Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. Miswak is not just a folk remedy. Studies have found it has antibacterial, antifungal, and anti-plaque properties, and clinical trials have shown its cleansing effectiveness to be equal to, and sometimes greater than, a standard toothbrush.²⁰ The frayed end of a miswak functions somewhat like a tiny brush, and the plant itself contains natural antimicrobial compounds. It is a legitimate cleaning tool, not an outdated curiosity.

Oil Pulling and Xylitol Gum

Oil pulling, the practice of swishing oil (usually coconut or sesame) in your mouth for 10 to 20 minutes, has a vocal following online. An early pilot study found that coconut oil pulling reduced plaque and gingival scores over a few weeks and suggested it could serve as an adjuvant to regular oral hygiene.²¹ But a meta-analysis pooling data from multiple studies painted a less impressive picture: it found no significant difference in plaque or gum inflammation scores between oil pulling and control groups.²² A randomized trial comparing coconut oil pulling to palm oil pulling found neither produced a significant reduction in key oral bacteria.²³ Oil pulling is unlikely to hurt you, but it is not a reliable substitute for physically cleaning between your teeth.

Xylitol gum is a more interesting option in a pinch. Xylitol, a sugar alcohol found in many sugar-free gums, reduces the acid-producing potential of dental plaque, making conditions less hospitable for the bacteria most responsible for cavities.²⁴ Chewing gum also stimulates saliva, which helps wash away food particles. This is not a replacement for mechanical cleaning between teeth, but if you are stuck somewhere without any tools at all, chewing xylitol gum after a meal does provide a small, real benefit.

Does Floss Even Work That Well

One reason the question “what can I use instead of floss” matters is that the evidence for floss itself is weaker than most people assume. A systematic review of studies comparing brushing alone to brushing plus flossing found that a greater part of the studies showed no clear benefit from adding floss for plaque or gingivitis measures.²⁵ This does not mean cleaning between your teeth is pointless. It likely means that people use floss poorly. In supervised clinical settings, where a hygienist flosses for the participant, results are much better than in real-world studies where people floss on their own. The problem with floss has never been the concept. It is that the technique is hard to do well, people rarely do it daily, and many find it uncomfortable.

That is exactly why alternatives exist, and why finding one you will actually use consistently matters more than choosing the theoretically “best” tool. An interdental brush used five days a week will outperform floss used once a week. A water flosser that takes 60 seconds is more realistic for most people than five minutes of careful flossing. Your dentist may still tell you to floss. The research says the most effective interdental cleaner is the one that fits your teeth, fits your hands, and fits your life well enough that you actually do it.