The plaque‐removing efficacy of an oscillating/rotating toothbrush

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to test the effectiveness of a new type of BRAUN electric toothbrush (D5) in comparison with the traditional BRAUN electric toothbrush (D3) and to a manual toothbrush (M). For this study, 60 dental students were selected who had no previous experience with the use of an electric toothbrush. The study consisted of 3 experiments. Prior to each experiment, all students were asked to abstain from all oral hygiene procedures for at least 24 h. In Exp I, the efficacy of toothbrushing was studied when one of the investigators brushed the teeth of the students. No toothpaste was used in this first part of the study. In Exp II, the efficacy of brushing was evaluated when the brushing was carried out by the students themselves. In Exp III, the efficacy of the brushing was studied after the students had received a professional instruction and oral prophylaxis. The available time for the brushing amounted to a total of 2 min per mouth. The amount of dental plaque was evaluated by means of the Silness and Löe plaque index at 6 sites around the tooth. Results showed in Exp I that both electric toothbrushes proved to remove significantly more plaque than the manual toothbrush (M 78%; D3 85%; D5 86%). In Exp II, no significant differences in plaque-removing efficacy were found between the 3 brushes (M 73%; D3 72%; D5 73%). In Exp III, the D5 proved to remove significantly more plaque than the other two brushes (M 77%; D3 77%; D5 83%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The effect of right or left handedness on caries experience and oral hygiene

“…[18] Electric toothbrushes are recommended for handicapped individuals or those with poor dexterity. [19] It is expected that individuals with better manual dexterity will clearly also brush efficiently. It has also been maintained that dexterity is important for physicians as well as for patients and patients with limited manual dexterity are compromised due to their inability to practice the necessary oral and prosthesis hygiene measures.…”

Prebrushing rinse with water on plaque removal: a split‐mouth design

“…Earlier data indicated that the difference in the response of the primary outcome in matched pairs is normally distributed with standard deviation 0.30 [pooled estimate out of Van der Weijden et al . ]. If the true difference in the mean response of matched pairs is 0.14, 38 participants were needed to be able to reject the null hypothesis that the response difference is zero with probability a (power) 0.8.…”

“…The main study parameter was the level of full‐mouth dental plaque as measured by the Silness & Löe Plaque index (PI) and modified as described by Van der Weijden et al . . Where 0 = no plaque, 1 = a film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin and adjacent area of the tooth 2 = moderate accumulation of soft deposits on the tooth and gingival margin that can be seen with the naked eye, 3 = abundance of soft matter on the tooth and gingival margin .…”

A comparison of the efficacy of powered and manual toothbrushes in controlling plaque and gingivitis: a clinical study

“…The results of these trials have been inconclusive, but there is a strong indication that all brushes are least effective on the lingual aspects of lower molars. The correct preset angulation of the brush head, design of the brush, bristle length and material, brush diameter and, lastly, patient skill can improve plaque control in such areas 12–14. Failure to meet these parameters in manual toothbrushes has resulted in development of powered toothbrushes.…”