Comparative professional plaque removal study using 8 branded toothbrushes – Claydon – 2002 – Journal of Clinical Periodontology – Wiley Online Library

Comparison of professional tooth cleaning with 8 standard toothbrushes

Comparative study of professional plaque removal by 8 commercial toothbrushes

Division of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, Bristol, UK

Division of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, Bristol, UK

Stafford Miller Ltd, Welwyn Garden City, UK

Stafford Miller Ltd, Welwyn Garden City, UK

Department of Computing and Medical Statistics, University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff, UK

Division of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, Bristol, UK

Division of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, Bristol, UK

Stafford Miller Ltd, Welwyn Garden City, UK

Stafford Miller Ltd, Welwyn Garden City, UK

Department of Computing and Medical Statistics, University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff, UK

abstract

Background and aim: Considerable interest has been shown in the plaque removal properties of modern toothbrush designs. The primary aim of the study was to compare the plaque removal properties of 8 relatively recent designs of manual toothbrush using a professional tooth brusher and within a commonly used time frame. A secondary aim was established to utilise the data to observationally appraise plaque accumulation together with the patterns of removal as a consequence of using the timed professional tooth brusher.

Method: The method was an 8‐period, single‐examiner, randomized, blind cross‐over study involving 24 healthy volunteers, balanced for residual effects. Subjects accumulated plaque over a 4 day no oral hygiene period. On day 4, the accumulated plaque was scored by plaque index at the mesial, mid and distal sites of each of the buccal and lingual surfaces of the assessed teeth. Subjects were then removed from the assessment area where they received a professional brushing timed to last 48 s. Brushing was completed according to pre‐study training without toothpaste and was followed by a re‐scoring of the remaining plaque. A washout period of 3 days was then allowed prior to the next period during which normal oral hygiene was resumed.

Similar quantities of plaque accumulated in each arch, although the difference between the buccal and lingual surfaces was of the order of 30%. The professional toothbrusher removed approximately 40% of the accumulated plaque in the 48 s allocated. The buccal surfaces were most effectively cleaned (≈45%) compared with the lingual (≈25%), with the plaque removal in the mesial and m >

Conclusions: These data derived from a standardized brushing method support the contention of many researchers that there is no one superior design of manual toothbrush. The minor and few site differences in favour of some brushes are unlikely to be of clinical significance to gingival health. This leaves uncontested the conclusion that the user is by far the most significant variable. Perhaps methods such as used in the present study could be more gainly employed to set a minimum standard of toothbrush efficacy.

Summary of the

Background/Objectives: Some interest has focused on the plaque removal properties of modern toothbrush designs. The primary objective of this study was to compare the plaque removal properties of 8 newer forms of manual toothbrushes when used by a professional user in a common time frame. A secondary goal was to use the data to estimate plaque accumulation and distance pattern observing as a result of the use of a professional time-definition toothbrush.

Material and methods: A randomized blinded cross-over study was performed with one investigator in 8 test periods in 24 healthy volunteers who were balanced for residual effects. The subjects accumulated plaque during a 4-day oral hygiene grace period. On day 4, the plaque index was determined at 6 sites per tooth examined. Afterwards a professional tooth cleaning was performed with one of the toothbrushes to be examined, which lasted 48 seconds. Tooth brushing was performed according to the training that had taken place prior to the study. The remaining plaque was then determined. A washout period of 3 days was applied until the next test phase, during which normal oral hygiene was performed.

Im Ober‐ und Unterkiefer sammelten sich gleiche Mengen von Plaque an, während der Unterschied zwischen bukkalen und oralen Flächen bei etwa 30% lag. Der professionelle Zahnbürster entfernte etwa 40% der angesammelten Plaque in den vorgegebenen 48 s. Die bukkalen Flächen wurden am effektivsten gereinigt (etwa 45%) im Vergleich zu den lingualen Flächen (etwa 25%), wobei die Plaqueentfernung an den mesialen Stellen 40% und an den zentralen Flächen 60% erreichte. Die Unterschiede zwischen den verschiedenen Zahnbursten lagen bei 5% der res >

Conclusions: These results, obtained with a standardized toothbrush method, support the widespread view that there is no superior toothbrush design. The small and few differences are unlikely to have clinical relevance for oral health. This means that the user is by far the most significant influencer. Possibly methods like the one used here could serve to set a minimum standard for the effectiveness of toothbrushes.

résumé

Origin, purpose: There has been considerable interest in the plaque removal capabilities of modern toothbrush models. The primary objective of this study was to compare the plaque removal capabilities with 8 recent manual brush models performed by a professional brusher in a normal time. A secondary objective was to use the data to estimate plaque accumulation with removal characteristics as a result of use by a professional brusher.

Method: The method was blind, single examiner, randomized crossover over 8 weeks with 24 healthy volunteers, balanced for residual effects. The subjects allowed plaque to accumulate for 4 days without oral hygiene. On the fourth day, the accumulated plaque was quantified by the index of plating on the mesial, medial and distal surfaces of all vestibular and lingual surfaces of the affected teeth. The subjects were then taken out of the examination room and given a 48-second professional brush. Brushing was carried out in accordance with a pre-study training without toothpaste and was followed by a new quantification of the residual plaque. After a 3-day break, normal oral hygiene was restored.

Une quantité similaire de plaque s’accumulait sur chaque arcade, bien que la différence entre les surfaces linguales et vestibulaires soit de l’ordre de 30%. Le brosseur professionnel éliminait approximativement 40% de la plaque accumulée lors des 48 secondes qui lui était attribuées. Les surfaces vestibulaires étaient les mieux nettoyées (environ 45%) par rapport aux linguales (environ 25%), avec une elimination dans les sites mésiaux et médians approchant les 40% et 60% respectivement. La différence de performance entre les brosses test correspondait à 5% des valeurs de plaque rés >

Conclusions: These data on a standardized brushing method support the opinion of many researchers that there are no superior manual brush models. The small and few differences are probably not of clinical importance to gum health. It is indisputable that the user is by far the most important variable. Perhaps, methods such as the one used here could be used to give a minimum standard to the efficiency of toothbrushes.

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Christina Cherry
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: