A naturalistic study of brushing patterns using powered toothbrushes

Abstract

Dental caries and periodontal disease are very common chronic diseases closely linked to inadequate removal of dental plaque. Powered toothbrushes are viewed as more effective at removing plaque; however, the conflicting evidence and considerable unexplained heterogeneity in their clinical outcomes does not corroborate the relative merits of powered tooth brushing. To explain the heterogeneity of brushing patterns with powered toothbrushes, we conducted a observational study of tooth brushing practices of 12 participants in their naturalistic setting. Integrated brush sensors and a digital data collection platform allowed unobtrusive and accurate capture of habitual brushing patterns. Annotated brushing data from 10 sessions per participant was chosen for scrutiny of brushing patterns. Analysis of brushing patterns from the total 120 sessions revealed substantial between- and within-participant variability in brushing patterns and efficiency. Most participants (91.67%) brushed for less than the generally prescribed two minutes; individual participants were also inconsistent in brushing duration across sessions. The time devoted to brushing different dental regions was also quite unequal. Participants generally brushed their buccal tooth surfaces more than twice as long as the occlusal (2.18 times longer (95% CI 1.42, 3.35; p < 0.001)) and lingual surfaces (2.22 times longer (95% CI 1.62, 3.10; p < 0.001); the lingual surfaces of the maxillary molars were often neglected (p < 0.001). Participants also varied in the epochs of excessive brushing pressure and the regions to which they were applied. In general, the occlusal surfaces were more likely to be brushed with excessive pressure (95% CI 0.10, 0.98; p = 0.015). Our study reveals that users of powered toothbrushes vary substantially in their use of the toothbrushes and diverge from recommended brushing practices. The inconsistent brushing patterns, between and within individuals, can affect effective plaque removal. Our findings underscore the limited uptake of generic oral self-care recommendations and emphasize the need for personalized brushing recommendations that derive from the objective sensor data provided by powered toothbrushes.

Periodontal pockets: Predictors for site‐related worsening after non‐surgical therapy—A long‐term retrospective cohort study

“…Both accessibility and visibility are limited, which is why controlled oral hygiene in these areas is difficult, which favours the increase in PPD at these sites (Jepsen et al, 2020; Nibali et al, 2016). The oral and palatal regions are often neglected (Deinzer et al, 2018; Essalat et al, 2022; Van der Weijden et al, 1998). Therefore, it is essential to ensure that interdental brushes have a good fit and therefore a good cleaning effect, and that they must be checked regularly for accuracy of fit.…”

Comparative Analysis of Plaque Removal and Wear between Electric–Mechanical and Bioelectric Toothbrushes

“…This study had some limitations. First, we used constant pressure and brushing speed; thus, changes in toothbrushing patterns in real life are not reflected [49]. Second, we evaluated plaque-removal efficiency in the same typodonts and area; thus, oral structures that vary from person to person are not reflected [50].…”

Comparative Analysis of Biofilm Removal Efficiency and Tooth Wear between Mechanical Electric and Bioelectric Devices

“…This study had some limitations. First, we used constant pressure and brushing speed; thus, changes in toothbrushing patterns in real life are not reflected [47]. Second, we evaluated plaqueremoval efficiency in the same typodonts and area; thus, oral structures that vary from person to person are not reflected [48].…”