Different powered toothbrushes for plaque control and gingival health

Deacon, Scott; Glenny, Anne‐Marie; Deery, Chris; Robinson, Peter G.; Heanue, Mike; Walmsley, A. D.; Shaw, William C.

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004971.pub2

Cited by 64 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, to minimize the carryover effect, which is the main concern during the use of a crossover design, we allowed for a 7 days washout period, during which the patients went back to using their normal toothbrushes. 8,9 The manual toothbrush that we use in our daily life was introduced in the 1920s; it has since then become an affordable oral hygiene device for the population at large. The most common oral hygiene habit in the last decade is toothbrushing using toothbrush and toothpaste.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Different Bristle Designs of Toothbrushes and Periodontal Status among Fixed Orthodontic Patients: A Double-blind Crossover Design

Punathil

Shetty³

et al. 2018

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of different bristle designs of toothbrushes and the periodontal status among patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment. Materials and methods:This randomized controlled trial (RCT) consisted of 45 adolescents (comprising 20 males and 25 females) undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment. The study participants were randomly allocated to three groups, each group being assigned a locally available toothbrush with a particular design of toothbrush bristle. In the first test phase, group I study participants were allocated to toothbrush with flat bristles, group II study subjects were allocated to toothbrush with zigzag bristles, and group III study participants were allocated to toothbrush with crisscross bristles. The study participants were recalled after 4 weeks to check the effectiveness of the allocated toothbrushes. A washout period of 1 week was maintained to ensure that there was no carryover effect of the different bristle designs. In the second test phase, each patient used the opposite toothbrush bristle design (group I: toothbrush with zigzag bristles, group II: toothbrush with crisscross bristles, and group III: toothbrush with flat bristles). Plaque scores were measured using Turesky-Gilmore-Glickman modification of Quigley-Hein plaque index (PI). Effectiveness of Different Results:In both phase 1 and 2 of this RCT, toothbrush with crisscross bristles exhibited maximum plaque reduction among the three different bristle design toothbrushes following 30 days (p = 0.312 ± 0.102 and 0.280 ± 0.110, respectively), which was statistically significant. Conclusion:It was concluded that all the three designs of toothbrushes were effective in removing plaque in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances. But among the three different toothbrushes, toothbrush with crisscross bristles showed the highest mean plaque reduction.Clinical significance: Plaque accumulation around the orthodontic brackets and gingival margins is quite common among the fixed orthodontic patients, who encounter difficulty in maintaining good oral hygiene. Specially designed toothbrushes are very essential for effective plaque removal among the patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Different Bristle Designs of Toothbrushes and Periodontal Status among Fixed Orthodontic Patients: A Double-blind Crossover Design

Punathil

Shetty³

et al. 2018

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Institutionalization of patients with ID was also shown to dramatically affect the loss of teeth due to periodontal disease. Although the most basic treatment and preventative activity against periodontal disease is tooth brushing [21], most patients at our clinic require assistance in this regard because of their ID. This assistance is less readily available in an institution, where caregivers have responsibility for multiple patients; patients with ID fare better when living at home where they are more likely to receive undivided attention.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low Bone Mass Is a Risk Factor in Periodontal Disease-Related Tooth Loss in Patients with Intellectual Disability

Numoto¹,

Mōri²,

Miyagawa³

et al. 2013

TODENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teeth are fundamental to maintaining good quality of life, but are often lost prematurely in individuals with intellectual disability. Furthermore, since bone mass decreases in menopausal women, women with intellectual disability have an augmented risk of losing their teeth. However, the relationship between periodontal disease-related tooth loss and bone mass has never been studied specifically in patients with intellectual disability. This study evaluated this relationship in a retrospective cohort study. Participants were female dental patients aged between 20 and 50 years and with an intellectual disability, who were treated in the Special Needs Dentistry unit of the Okayama University Hospital from January 2009 to March 2010. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze which factors affect periodontal disease-related tooth loss. Information relating to 12 predictor variables, including age and bone mass level, was derived from medical records. The 27 subjects had a total of 704 teeth at the time of initial examination, but 20 teeth (2.8%) had been lost owing to periodontal disease by the time bone mass measurements were recorded. Results of the multinomial logistic regression analysis indicated a significant odds ratio for three items: number of missing teeth at the time of initial examination, bone mass, and living environment. This result suggests that low bone mass is an independent risk factor in tooth loss secondary to periodontal disease in patients with intellectual disability. Dentists should thus take account of this heightened risk of tooth loss when caring for post-menopausal women with intellectual disability.

show abstract

“…A 2011 Cochrane review compared the effi cacy of various power technologies (Deacon et al 2010 ). Rechargeable electric toothbrushes are more sophisticated, and these differ signifi cantly in the type of cleaning technology used.…”

Section: Power Brush Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Dental Caries

Goldberg¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different powered toothbrushes for plaque control and gingival health

Cited by 64 publications

References 45 publications

Effectiveness of Different Bristle Designs of Toothbrushes and Periodontal Status among Fixed Orthodontic Patients: A Double-blind Crossover Design

Effectiveness of Different Bristle Designs of Toothbrushes and Periodontal Status among Fixed Orthodontic Patients: A Double-blind Crossover Design

Low Bone Mass Is a Risk Factor in Periodontal Disease-Related Tooth Loss in Patients with Intellectual Disability

Understanding Dental Caries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About