No abstract

Purpose To compare a novel oscillating‐rotating (O‐R) electric rechargeable toothbrush with micro‐vibrations to a marketed premium sonic toothbrush for reduction of gingivitis and plaque in an 8‐week randomized controlled trial. Methods Adult subjects with evidence of gingivitis and plaque were randomized to use either the novel O‐R brush (Oral‐B iO) or the sonic brush with sodium fluoride dentifrice twice daily. Assessments at baseline and week 8 included the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI). Gingivitis status (‘healthy’/’not healthy’) was classified per the American Academy of Periodontology/European Federation of Periodontology criteria. Results Ninety subjects were randomized to treatment and completed the study. Subjects had a mean age of 49.2 years; 68 were females. At baseline, the mean number (standard deviation [SD]) of bleeding sites for all subjects was 32.8 (16.43). At week 8, the O‐R brush group had a higher percentage of ‘healthy’ gingiva subjects than the sonic brush group (84% vs. 53% P = 0.003). In the between‐group comparisons at week 8, the O‐R brush group showed statistically significantly greater reductions (P < 0.001) compared to the sonic group for MGI, GBI, and number of bleeding sites. The O‐R brush group also had statistically significantly greater plaque removal (P ≤ 0.011) than the sonic brush group for whole mouth plaque as well as plaque in the proximal regions and along the gingival margin. Conclusions The novel O‐R electric toothbrush with micro‐vibrations provided greater plaque and gingivitis reductions than the marketed premium sonic toothbrush over 8 weeks.

Purpose To compare a novel oscillating‐rotating (O‐R) electric rechargeable toothbrush with micro‐vibrations (Oral‐B iO) to a manual brush for gingivitis and plaque reduction. Methods Adult subjects with gingivitis and plaque were randomized to use either the O‐R or the manual toothbrush with standard fluoride dentifrice twice daily. Efficacy was assessed at baseline, week 1, and week 8 using the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI). Gingivitis status (‘healthy’/‘not healthy’) was also assessed, per the American Academy of Periodontology/European Federation of Periodontology criteria. Results One hundred and ten subjects were enrolled and completed the randomized controlled trial. The baseline mean number (SD) of bleeding sites for all subjects was 32.11 (16.703). At week 8, 82% of subjects using the O‐R toothbrush were categorized as ‘healthy’ (<10% bleeding sites), versus 24% of subjects using the manual brush (P < 0.001). Subjects using the O‐R toothbrush showed statistically significantly greater reductions (P < 0.001) in the number of bleeding sites, GBI scores and MGI scores versus those using a manual toothbrush as early as 1 week and throughout the 8‐week study. The O‐R toothbrush also provided statistically significantly greater reductions (P < 0.001) in all plaque measures, including sub‐regions, versus the manual toothbrush after a single brushing and at weeks 1 and 8. Conclusions The novel O‐R electric toothbrush with micro‐vibrations provided statistically significantly greater plaque and gingivitis reductions versus a manual toothbrush, with performance benefits demonstrated after a single brushing and continuing throughout the 8‐week study.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of an oscillating‐rotating (O‐R) electric rechargeable toothbrush with a novel round brush head comprised of regular and tapered bristles in reducing plaque and gingivitis versus a manual toothbrush. Methods This was a randomized, examiner‐blind, parallel group, five‐week study. Participants with mild‐to‐moderate plaque and gingivitis received an oral examination and were evaluated for baseline plaque (Rustogi Modified Navy Index), gingivitis (Modified Gingival Index) and gingival bleeding (Gingival Bleeding Index). Qualifying participants were randomly assigned to the novel Oral‐B sensitive brush head (EB60) on an Oral‐B Vitality O‐R handle (D12) or an ADA manual toothbrush. Participants brushed twice daily with the assigned brush and a standard fluoride dentifrice for 5 weeks before returning for an oral examination and plaque and gingivitis evaluations. Results A total of 150 participants were randomized to treatment and completed the study (mean age = 45.7 years). Both brushes demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in number of bleeding sites versus baseline (P < 0.001). At Week 5, the number of bleeding sites was reduced from baseline by 11.15 (52.2%) for the O‐R brush and 5.04 (23.6%) for the manual brush. The treatment difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Significant reductions versus baseline (P < 0.001) were also seen for both brushes for MGI, GBI and Rustogi plaque measures (whole mouth, gingival margin and proximal), but the O‐R brush produced significantly greater reductions versus the manual brush (P < 0.001). Conclusion The O‐R handle and round brush head with tapered and regular bristles produced greater plaque and gingivitis reductions than the manual brush.