How effective is a chewable brush in removing plaque in children? A pilot study

Bezgin, Tuğba; Dağ, Canan; Özalp, Nurhan

doi:10.4103/2321-6646.155557

Cited by 11 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In studies published by Myoken et al [13] and Bezgin et al [14], Fuzzy brush was more effective in reducing tooth plaque from oral surfaces of the teeth in children compared to a conventional brush, while in our study no statistically significant difference was observed. Our study has shown that the use of both brushes leads to a significant reduction in plaque on all dental surfaces.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

Efficiency of chewable toothbrush in reduction of dental plaque in students

Mladenović¹,

Cvetković²,

Martinovic³

et al. 2019

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Besides classical and electrical toothbrushes market offers tooth brushes that can be chewed, like chewing gums. The aim of this study was to show the effectiveness of chewable toothbrush versus a conventional brush in the students’ population. Methods The prospective study included 346 students. For this research, we used a e-questionnaire for “smart” phones, that students completed outside the dental office. Respondents are divided into two groups: control group used conventional toothbrushes, respondents from the tested group used chewable toothbrush. For assessment of accumulation of the plaque we used TQHI index. For testing statistical hypotheses, the following were used: t-test for two independent samples and analysis of the variance of repeated measurements. Results Before brushing teeth, the average TQHI value for chewable brushes is 2.8 ± 0.3, while conventional is 2.7 ± 0.3, which is not a statistically significant difference ( p = 0.448). After brushing teeth, the average TQHI value for chewable brushes is 2.0 ± 0.1, while conventional 2.0 ± 0.3, which is also not statistically significant ( p = 0.729). Observing the index of the plaque values on the tooth surfaces in the upper jaw, in both groups, there was a statistically significant change in the amount of plaque in time ( p < 0.001). There is a statistically significant interaction between groups and changes in the amount of plaque in the observed period ( p = 0.013). Conclusions The fact that there is no significant difference in the effectiveness of the tested brushes indicates the benefits of using chewable toothbrushes in order to reduce plaque, primarily in the inability to use conventional brushes.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

Efficiency of chewable toothbrush in reduction of dental plaque in students

Mladenović¹,

Cvetković²,

Martinovic³

et al. 2019

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on the study of Bezgin et al, 4 the sample size was calculated as the minimum sample of 60 was required to detect a significant difference between the two brushes tested and also using the sample size formula. Residential home was selected in order to standardize the diet, oral hygiene practices, and to monitor the children for a week during the trial.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to avoid the risk of swallowing, the manufacturer of theCB does not recommend its use in children under 6 years. 4 Thus, we tied dental floss in the center of CB for additional safety, although the age group we selected was well beyond the risk.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Allocation concealment was done by using sealed envelopes, wherein the respective brushes (MB and CB) were randomly allocated by the toss of a coin to 60 children. The Turesky modification of the Quigley–Hein index (TQHI) was used to assess supragingival plaque and Loe and Silness gingival index (Table 1) 4,7 was used to assess gingival health status. TQHI scores were obtained from the buccal and lingual surfaces of all gradable teeth, and the average scores were calculated for each subject.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is a disposable, all-in-one brush comprised of acacia senegal gum, mint aroma, xylitol, aspartame, sodium monofluorophosphate, limonene, linalool, eugenol, and cinnamal. 4…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative Evaluation of Plaque Removal Effectiveness of Manual and Chewable Toothbrushes in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Kayalvizhi

Radha

Prathima

et al. 2019

International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveIn children, manual dexterity poses a problem with the use of manual tooth brushes (MB), resulting in inefficient plaque removal. Recently, novel chewable brushes (CB) have been introduced which could overcome this problem but are less researched in children. The objective of this study is to assess and compare the plaque removal effectiveness of CB with that of MB.Materials and methodsA total of 60 patients aged 8 to 10 years were enrolled in a single-blinded randomized clinical trial. At baseline, disclosing solution was applied and the Turesky modification of the Quigley–Hein index (TQHI) plaque index and Loe and Silness gingival index were recorded. The subjects were randomly divided into two groups as group I (MB) and group II (CB) and they were instructed to use their respective brushes for a period of 1 week. For statistical comparison, the difference (prebrushing minus postbrushing) in average scores was calculated. Data were evaluated by the independent t test and paired t test, with p < 0.05.ResultsThe overall plaque scores reduced from 1.71 ± 0.4 to 0.79 ± 0.24 when using CB and from 1.64 ± 0.64 to 1.13 ± 0.47 when using MBs. On lingual tooth surfaces, CB showed a plaque reduction of 38.70 ± 11.04 to 12.60 ± 4.79 compared to less reduction from 37.43 ± 14.26 to 28.73 ± 11.37 for MB. The overall gingival scores were also reduced from 0.33 ± 0.51 to 0.09 ± 0.07 when using CB and from 0.30 ± 0.33 to 0.19 ± 0.23 when using MB. Differences in scores between the two brushes were statistically significant (p = 0.0001).ConclusionIt was concluded that the experimental CB was able to remove a significant amount of plaque, particularly on the lingual surfaces, and reduced gingival index scores, thereby improving oral hygiene and gingival health status.How to cite this articleKayalvizhi G, Radha S, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Plaque Removal Effectiveness of Manual and Chewable Toothbrushes in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12(2):107–110.

show abstract

Effectiveness of plaque removal with an experimental chewable brush in children between age 9 and 13 years

Joshi

Dixit

2018

Eur Arch Paediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How effective is a chewable brush in removing plaque in children? A pilot study

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Efficiency of chewable toothbrush in reduction of dental plaque in students

Efficiency of chewable toothbrush in reduction of dental plaque in students

Comparative Evaluation of Plaque Removal Effectiveness of Manual and Chewable Toothbrushes in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Effectiveness of plaque removal with an experimental chewable brush in children between age 9 and 13 years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About