The Experts below are selected from a list of 7674 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Aaron R Biesbrock - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Study to Assess the Safety and Tolerability of Three Toothbrushes
2015Co-Authors: Athena S. Papas, Phd Gianluca Martuscelli, L. Singh, Constance Stone, Aaron R BiesbrockAbstract:This study evaluated the oral soft tissue safety and tolerability of an experi-mental powered Toothbrush (Crest ® SpinBrush ™ Pro) compared to two leading manual Toothbrushes: an advanced-design manual Toothbrush (Oral-B ® Cross-Action®) and a flat-trimmed Toothbrush (Oral-B ® 40 Indicator®). Manual brushes are generally viewed as safe for use, and as such are appropriate controls. A total of 140 subjects was enrolled in this single-center, randomized, examiner-blind parallel study over a four-week test period. Subjects were instructed to brush in their normal manner, twice per day for 60 seconds per use. An oral soft tissue interview and examination were conducted by a trained dentist examiner at baseline, as well as three days and four weeks after baseline to assess clinical signs and symptoms of oral irritation associated with use of the Toothbrushes. Overall, there were 19 adverse events reported for 18 subjects (13 % of the pop-ulation). The adverse events were distributed across test groups with five subjects in the experimental powered brush group, eight in the advanced design manual Toothbrush group and five in the flat-trimmed Toothbrush group experiencing at least one adverse event. The most frequently reported adverse event was local-ized irritation/inflammation of the gingiva. All adverse events were mild in severity except for one report of severe hyperesthesia (tooth sensitivity) in the ad-vanced-design manual Toothbrush group. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for the proportion of subjects reporting adverse events at either three days or four weeks of product use. The results of this study indicate that daily use with the Crest SpinBrush Pro powered Toothbrush is at least as safe as two leading manual Toothbrushes. (J Clin Dent 13:203–206, 2002.
-
plaque removal efficacy of an advanced rotation oscillation power Toothbrush versus a new sonic Toothbrush
American Journal of Dentistry, 2008Co-Authors: Aaron R Biesbrock, Robert D Bartizek, C R Goyal, Patricia A Walters, J QaqishAbstract:PURPOSE To evaluate the plaque removal efficacy and safety of an advanced rotation-oscillation power Toothbrush relative to a newly-introduced sonic Toothbrush. METHODS This study used a randomized, examiner-blind, two-treatment, four-period, four-sequence crossover design. Subjects received both Toothbrushes (Oral-B Triumph and Sonicare FlexCare) and a standard dentifrice from the study site and used each Toothbrush at home during an acclimation phase prior to their plaque measurement visits. After abstaining from all oral hygiene for 24 hours, subjects returned to the study site and were assessed with the Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index. They then brushed for 2 minutes with their first randomly-assigned Toothbrush and post-brushing plaque scores were recorded. This procedure was followed for three additional study visits, with subjects using their normal at-home Toothbrush and dentifrice for the 2- to 5-day washout periods between visits. Subjects always abstained from all oral hygiene for 24 hours prior to their visits. RESULTS 45 subjects completed the study. Both brushes were found to be safe and both significantly reduced plaque after a single brushing. Oral-B Triumph was statistically significantly (P < 0.0001) more effective in plaque removal than Sonicare FlexCare for whole mouth plaque scores, gingival marginal plaque scores and interproximal plaque scores. Compared to Sonicare FlexCare, the adjusted mean plaque reduction scores for Oral-B Triumph were 21%, 23% and 22% greater for whole mouth, marginal and interproximal areas, respectively.
-
plaque removal efficacy of four types of dental floss
Journal of Periodontology, 2008Co-Authors: Geza T. Terezhalmy, Robert D Bartizek, Aaron R BiesbrockAbstract:Background: Effective plaque removal is essential for gingival health, and dental floss is used to augment plaque removal achieved with a Toothbrush.Methods: This randomized, controlled, examiner-masked, five-period crossover study examined plaque removal in 25 subjects following single use with an American Dental Association reference manual Toothbrush alone and in combination with four floss products: three traditional (unwaxed, woven, and shred-resistant) and one powered flosser. Plaque was scored before and after brushing for 1 minute. The Rustogi modified Navy plaque index was used to focus scores on tooth areas contacted during the proper use of dental floss.Results: Mean plaque reductions (baseline minus postbrushing) in floss contact areas were as follows: 0.181 with the Toothbrush alone; 0.228, 0.217, and 0.210 for the Toothbrush in combination with the three traditional flosses, unwaxed, woven, and shred-resistant, respectively; and 0.252 for the Toothbrush plus powered flosser. No statistically...
-
comparative plaque removal efficacy of a dual action power Toothbrush and a manual tooth effects by tooth type
American Journal of Dentistry, 2006Co-Authors: Svetlana Farrell, Robert D Bartizek, Geza T. Terezhalmy, Aaron R BiesbrockAbstract:PURPOSE To evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of a dual action power Toothbrush (Crest SpinBrush Pro Clean) relative to an ADA reference manual Toothbrush. In addition to overall plaque removal, emphasis was put on plaque reduction around the gingival margin, interproximal areas of the tooth and in the posterior segment of the dentition. METHODS The study was a randomized, examiner-blind, two-treatment, four-period, crossover design. After an informed consent, 50 healthy volunteers were randomized to four treatment sequences and used each Toothbrush twice according to their assigned treatment sequence. At every visit, plaque removal was assessed at baseline and after a single brushing using the Rustogi-modified Navy Plaque Index that allows estimation of interproximal plaque and plaque at the gingival margin. Self-reported and examiner-observed adverse events were collected at every visit. Mean Plaque Index (MPI) scores were calculated for the whole mouth, gingival region, interproximal region and different areas of the dentition using an analysis of covariance for crossover design with baseline plaque score as the covariate. RESULTS 49 subjects provided complete data and were included in the analysis. Baseline MPI scores were not significantly different between the groups for any investigated tooth region or dentition area. Following a single brushing, the power Toothbrush provided a reduction of 43% (P< 0.001) for the whole mouth MPI, 43% (P< 0.001) for the gingival margin MPI and 65% (P< 0.001) for the interproximal MPI relative to a manual brush. Use of the power Toothbrush resulted in a significant reduction of whole-mouth and gingival margin MPI across all areas of the dentition compared to a manual Toothbrush (P< 0.001). The power Toothbrush also had superior interproximal plaque removal efficacy compared to the manual Toothbrush for molars (P< 0.001, with 118% greater removal score). Both brushes were well tolerated.
-
one and 3 minute plaque removal by a battery powered versus a manual Toothbrush
Journal of Periodontology, 2004Co-Authors: Karen B Williams, Aaron R Biesbrock, Anita Ferrante, Kathy Dockter, Jan Haun, Robert D BartizekAbstract:Background: A new battery-powered Toothbrush with a fundamentally different design than other powered Toothbrushes has recently been introduced. The new Toothbrush has a powered oscillating round head and a second powered head that translates back and forth. This study compared the plaque removal efficacy of a manual Toothbrush to this new powered Toothbrush. Methods: This randomized, controlled, examiner-masked, four-period cross-over study examined plaque removal with the two Toothbrushes following a single use in 40 subjects. Plaque was scored before brushing and after 1 and 3 minutes of brushing using the Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein index. Results: Baseline plaque scores were 2.98 prior to using the powered Toothbrush and 2.99 prior to using the manual Toothbrush. The powered Toothbrush delivered a covariance-adjusted mean plaque score change from baseline of 0.61 after 1 minute of brushing and 0.93 after 3 minutes of brushing. The adjusted mean changes for the manual Toothbrush were 0.43...
Robert D Bartizek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
plaque removal efficacy of an advanced rotation oscillation power Toothbrush versus a new sonic Toothbrush
American Journal of Dentistry, 2008Co-Authors: Aaron R Biesbrock, Robert D Bartizek, C R Goyal, Patricia A Walters, J QaqishAbstract:PURPOSE To evaluate the plaque removal efficacy and safety of an advanced rotation-oscillation power Toothbrush relative to a newly-introduced sonic Toothbrush. METHODS This study used a randomized, examiner-blind, two-treatment, four-period, four-sequence crossover design. Subjects received both Toothbrushes (Oral-B Triumph and Sonicare FlexCare) and a standard dentifrice from the study site and used each Toothbrush at home during an acclimation phase prior to their plaque measurement visits. After abstaining from all oral hygiene for 24 hours, subjects returned to the study site and were assessed with the Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index. They then brushed for 2 minutes with their first randomly-assigned Toothbrush and post-brushing plaque scores were recorded. This procedure was followed for three additional study visits, with subjects using their normal at-home Toothbrush and dentifrice for the 2- to 5-day washout periods between visits. Subjects always abstained from all oral hygiene for 24 hours prior to their visits. RESULTS 45 subjects completed the study. Both brushes were found to be safe and both significantly reduced plaque after a single brushing. Oral-B Triumph was statistically significantly (P < 0.0001) more effective in plaque removal than Sonicare FlexCare for whole mouth plaque scores, gingival marginal plaque scores and interproximal plaque scores. Compared to Sonicare FlexCare, the adjusted mean plaque reduction scores for Oral-B Triumph were 21%, 23% and 22% greater for whole mouth, marginal and interproximal areas, respectively.
-
plaque removal efficacy of four types of dental floss
Journal of Periodontology, 2008Co-Authors: Geza T. Terezhalmy, Robert D Bartizek, Aaron R BiesbrockAbstract:Background: Effective plaque removal is essential for gingival health, and dental floss is used to augment plaque removal achieved with a Toothbrush.Methods: This randomized, controlled, examiner-masked, five-period crossover study examined plaque removal in 25 subjects following single use with an American Dental Association reference manual Toothbrush alone and in combination with four floss products: three traditional (unwaxed, woven, and shred-resistant) and one powered flosser. Plaque was scored before and after brushing for 1 minute. The Rustogi modified Navy plaque index was used to focus scores on tooth areas contacted during the proper use of dental floss.Results: Mean plaque reductions (baseline minus postbrushing) in floss contact areas were as follows: 0.181 with the Toothbrush alone; 0.228, 0.217, and 0.210 for the Toothbrush in combination with the three traditional flosses, unwaxed, woven, and shred-resistant, respectively; and 0.252 for the Toothbrush plus powered flosser. No statistically...
-
comparative plaque removal efficacy of a dual action power Toothbrush and a manual tooth effects by tooth type
American Journal of Dentistry, 2006Co-Authors: Svetlana Farrell, Robert D Bartizek, Geza T. Terezhalmy, Aaron R BiesbrockAbstract:PURPOSE To evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of a dual action power Toothbrush (Crest SpinBrush Pro Clean) relative to an ADA reference manual Toothbrush. In addition to overall plaque removal, emphasis was put on plaque reduction around the gingival margin, interproximal areas of the tooth and in the posterior segment of the dentition. METHODS The study was a randomized, examiner-blind, two-treatment, four-period, crossover design. After an informed consent, 50 healthy volunteers were randomized to four treatment sequences and used each Toothbrush twice according to their assigned treatment sequence. At every visit, plaque removal was assessed at baseline and after a single brushing using the Rustogi-modified Navy Plaque Index that allows estimation of interproximal plaque and plaque at the gingival margin. Self-reported and examiner-observed adverse events were collected at every visit. Mean Plaque Index (MPI) scores were calculated for the whole mouth, gingival region, interproximal region and different areas of the dentition using an analysis of covariance for crossover design with baseline plaque score as the covariate. RESULTS 49 subjects provided complete data and were included in the analysis. Baseline MPI scores were not significantly different between the groups for any investigated tooth region or dentition area. Following a single brushing, the power Toothbrush provided a reduction of 43% (P< 0.001) for the whole mouth MPI, 43% (P< 0.001) for the gingival margin MPI and 65% (P< 0.001) for the interproximal MPI relative to a manual brush. Use of the power Toothbrush resulted in a significant reduction of whole-mouth and gingival margin MPI across all areas of the dentition compared to a manual Toothbrush (P< 0.001). The power Toothbrush also had superior interproximal plaque removal efficacy compared to the manual Toothbrush for molars (P< 0.001, with 118% greater removal score). Both brushes were well tolerated.
-
one and 3 minute plaque removal by a battery powered versus a manual Toothbrush
Journal of Periodontology, 2004Co-Authors: Karen B Williams, Aaron R Biesbrock, Anita Ferrante, Kathy Dockter, Jan Haun, Robert D BartizekAbstract:Background: A new battery-powered Toothbrush with a fundamentally different design than other powered Toothbrushes has recently been introduced. The new Toothbrush has a powered oscillating round head and a second powered head that translates back and forth. This study compared the plaque removal efficacy of a manual Toothbrush to this new powered Toothbrush. Methods: This randomized, controlled, examiner-masked, four-period cross-over study examined plaque removal with the two Toothbrushes following a single use in 40 subjects. Plaque was scored before brushing and after 1 and 3 minutes of brushing using the Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein index. Results: Baseline plaque scores were 2.98 prior to using the powered Toothbrush and 2.99 prior to using the manual Toothbrush. The powered Toothbrush delivered a covariance-adjusted mean plaque score change from baseline of 0.61 after 1 minute of brushing and 0.93 after 3 minutes of brushing. The adjusted mean changes for the manual Toothbrush were 0.43...
-
plaque removal efficacy of a battery operated power Toothbrush compared to two control manual Toothbrushes in single use studies
American Journal of Dentistry, 2002Co-Authors: Paul J Heins, Robert D Bartizek, Patricia A Walters, Aaron R BiesbrockAbstract:Purpose Recently, a power Toothbrush (Crest SpinBrush) has been reported to remove plaque more effectively than a manual Toothbrush (Colgate Navigator). The objective of these studies was to compare the plaque removal efficacy of two control manual Toothbrushes (Colgate Wave and Colgate Plus) to an experimental power Toothbrush (Crest SpinBrush). The Colgate Plus has an ordinary flat bristle trim design, while the Colgate Wave has an advanced design multilevel bristle trim for greater interproximal penetration. Materials and methods Each of these two studies were randomized, controlled, examiner-blind, 4-period crossover designs which examined plaque removal with the experimental Toothbrush relative to a control manual Toothbrush following a single use in 37 and 35 subjects, respectively. Plaque was scored before and after brushing using the Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Index. Results In the first study, average baseline plaque scores were 2.88 and 2.89 for the experimental Toothbrush and advanced designed manual control Toothbrush (Colgate Wave) treatment groups, respectively. With respect to all surfaces examined, the experimental Toothbrush delivered an adjusted (via analysis of covariance) mean difference between baseline and post-brushing plaque scores of 0.70 while the control Toothbrush delivered an adjusted mean difference of 0.59. The difference between the brushes was statistically significant (P
Manish Jain - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparative effect of neemstick and Toothbrush on plaque removal and gingival health a clinical trial
Journal of Advanced Oral Research, 2011Co-Authors: Ajay Bhambal, Sonal Kothari, Sudhanshu Saxena, Manish JainAbstract:Introduction: The 80 percent of the population in India who live in rural areas still start their day with the chewing stick. Researchers believe that the use of neem stick is responsible for the healthy teeth of Indian villagers, people who never had access to any modern dental care facilities or fancy Toothbrushes. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of neem stick and Toothbrush on plaque removal and gingival health. Materials and Method: A single blind, randomized cross-over study conducted among 30 study subjects regularly attending the out patient department of the People’s College Of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal. QuigleyHein plaque and Loe-Silness gingival index were taken at baseline and again following 3 weeks use of either neemstick or Toothbrush. Professional tooth cleaning was done 7 days before the start of study and repeated after a further 3 weeks. Statistical analysis was done using t- tests and one way analysis of variance (ANOVA). P value <0.05 was considered statistical significant. Result: No significant difference has been found between Toothbrush and neemstick. But, both has resulted in significant reduction in plaque and gingival scores compared to baseline. Conclusion: Neemstick is equally effective as Toothbrush in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation.
Heinrich Wehrbein - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of an oscillating rotating Toothbrush versus a sonic Toothbrush in orthodontic patients using digital imaging analysis of the anterior dentition
Angle Orthodontist, 2019Co-Authors: Christina Erbe, J M Grender, Hans Timm, Malgorzata Klukowska, Collin Jacobs, Heinrich WehrbeinAbstract:ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the plaque removal efficacy of an oscillating-rotating electric Toothbrush with an orthodontic brush head versus a sonic Toothbrush in adolescent patients with fixed ...
-
comparative assessment of plaque removal and motivation between a manual Toothbrush and an interactive power Toothbrush in adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances a single center examiner blind randomized controlled trial
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2019Co-Authors: Christina Erbe, J M Grender, Renzo Alberto Ccahuanavasquez, Hans Timm, Violetta Klees, Fabienne Braunbeck, Priscila Ferrariperon, Pamela Cunningham, Ralf Adam, Heinrich WehrbeinAbstract:Introduction The objective of this 2-arm parallel trial was to determine the plaque removal efficacy (main outcome) and the motivation assessment (secondary outcome) comparing a manual versus an interactive power Toothbrush in orthodontic patients. Methods Sixty adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances in both arches were randomized in a 1:1 ratio in this parallel, randomized, examiner-blind controlled clinical trial. Eligibility criteria included at least 16 natural teeth, 1-6 “focus care areas,” plaque score of ≥1.75, no severe caries, gingivitis and periodontitis, no dental prophylaxis, no smoking, no antibiotics, and no chlorhexidine mouth rinse. Subjects were to brush unsupervised with either an interactive power Toothbrush (Oral-B Professional Care 6000, D36/EB20) with Bluetooth technology or a regular manual Toothbrush (Oral-B Indicator 35 soft). Focus care areas were each brushed for 10 additional seconds. Plaque removal was assessed with the use of the Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TMQHPI) to determine change from baseline at 2 and 6 weeks. Supervised brushing at screening and post-treatment visits recorded actual brushing times. Subject-reported motivational aspects were recorded at screening and week 6. Results Fifty-nine subjects aged 13-17 years completed the study. The interactive power Toothbrush provided significantly (P Conclusions An interactive power Toothbrush generated increased brushing times and significantly greater plaque removal versus a manual brush.
-
efficacy of 3 Toothbrush treatments on plaque removal in orthodontic patients assessed with digital plaque imaging a randomized controlled trial
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2013Co-Authors: Christina Erbe, J M Grender, Hans Timm, Malgorzata Klukowska, Iris Tsaknaki, Heinrich WehrbeinAbstract:Introduction Good oral hygiene is a challenge for orthodontic patients because food readily becomes trapped around the brackets and under the archwires, and appliances are an obstruction to mechanical brushing. The purpose of this study was to compare plaque removal efficacy of 3 Toothbrush treatments in orthodontic subjects. Methods This was a replicate-use, single-brushing, 3-treatment, examiner-blind, randomized, 6-period crossover study with washout periods of approximately 24 hours between visits. Forty-six adolescent and young adult patients with fixed orthodontics from a university clinic in Germany were randomized, based on computer-generated randomization, to 1 of 3 treatments: (1) oscillating-rotating electric Toothbrush with a specially designed orthodontic brush head (Oral-B Triumph, OD17; Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, Ohio); (2) the same electric Toothbrush handle with a regular brush head (EB25; Procter & Gamble); and (3) a regular manual Toothbrush (American Dental Association, Chicago, Ill). The primary outcome was the plaque score change from baseline, which we determined using digital plaque image analysis. Results Forty-five subjects completed the study. The differences in mean plaque removal (95% confidence interval) between the electric Toothbrush with an orthodontic brush head (6% [4.4%-7.6%]) or a regular brush head (3.8% [2.2%-5.3%]) and the manual Toothbrush were significant ( P P = 0.007) to the regular brush head. No adverse events were seen. Conclusions The electric Toothbrush, with either brush head, demonstrated significantly greater plaque removal over the manual brush. The orthodontic brush head was superior to the regular head.
Hans Timm - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of an oscillating rotating Toothbrush versus a sonic Toothbrush in orthodontic patients using digital imaging analysis of the anterior dentition
Angle Orthodontist, 2019Co-Authors: Christina Erbe, J M Grender, Hans Timm, Malgorzata Klukowska, Collin Jacobs, Heinrich WehrbeinAbstract:ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the plaque removal efficacy of an oscillating-rotating electric Toothbrush with an orthodontic brush head versus a sonic Toothbrush in adolescent patients with fixed ...
-
comparative assessment of plaque removal and motivation between a manual Toothbrush and an interactive power Toothbrush in adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances a single center examiner blind randomized controlled trial
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2019Co-Authors: Christina Erbe, J M Grender, Renzo Alberto Ccahuanavasquez, Hans Timm, Violetta Klees, Fabienne Braunbeck, Priscila Ferrariperon, Pamela Cunningham, Ralf Adam, Heinrich WehrbeinAbstract:Introduction The objective of this 2-arm parallel trial was to determine the plaque removal efficacy (main outcome) and the motivation assessment (secondary outcome) comparing a manual versus an interactive power Toothbrush in orthodontic patients. Methods Sixty adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances in both arches were randomized in a 1:1 ratio in this parallel, randomized, examiner-blind controlled clinical trial. Eligibility criteria included at least 16 natural teeth, 1-6 “focus care areas,” plaque score of ≥1.75, no severe caries, gingivitis and periodontitis, no dental prophylaxis, no smoking, no antibiotics, and no chlorhexidine mouth rinse. Subjects were to brush unsupervised with either an interactive power Toothbrush (Oral-B Professional Care 6000, D36/EB20) with Bluetooth technology or a regular manual Toothbrush (Oral-B Indicator 35 soft). Focus care areas were each brushed for 10 additional seconds. Plaque removal was assessed with the use of the Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TMQHPI) to determine change from baseline at 2 and 6 weeks. Supervised brushing at screening and post-treatment visits recorded actual brushing times. Subject-reported motivational aspects were recorded at screening and week 6. Results Fifty-nine subjects aged 13-17 years completed the study. The interactive power Toothbrush provided significantly (P Conclusions An interactive power Toothbrush generated increased brushing times and significantly greater plaque removal versus a manual brush.
-
randomised clinical study of plaque removal efficacy of a power Toothbrush in a paediatric population
International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, 2017Co-Authors: Esti Davidovich, J M Grender, Renzo Alberto Ccahuanavasquez, Hans Timm, Pam Cunningham, Avi ZiniAbstract:Background Clinical investigations of plaque removal efficacy of power Toothbrushes in children are limited. Aim To compare plaque removal of a power versus manual Toothbrush in a paediatric population. Design This was a randomised, replicate-use, single-brushing, examiner-blinded, two-treatment, four-period crossover clinical trial in children 8–11 years of age. Subjects were randomly assigned to a treatment sequence involving an oscillating–rotating power Toothbrush and a manual Toothbrush control. Subjects brushed under supervision with a NaF dentifrice. Plaque was assessed pre- (baseline) and post-brushing using the Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index by two examiners. Plaque scores were averaged for mixed and permanent dentition on a per-subject basis and analysed using a mixed-model ancova for a crossover design. Results Forty-one subjects (mean 9.0 years) were randomised and completed the trial. Both the power brush and manual brush provided statistically significant mean plaque reductions versus baseline in all analyses (P < 0.001). For both examiners, plaque removal was significantly (P < 0.001) larger for the power brush in permanent and mixed dentitions. The interexaminer correlations for the permanent dentition were strong (ICC = 0.68–0.88) for pre-brushing plaque across all periods. Conclusions An oscillating–rotating power Toothbrush provided superior plaque reduction versus a manual Toothbrush in children.
-
a randomized clinical trial comparing plaque removal efficacy of an oscillating rotating power Toothbrush to a manual Toothbrush by multiple examiners
International Journal of Dental Hygiene, 2016Co-Authors: B Kurtz, J M Grender, Hans Timm, Malgorzata Klukowska, Markus Reise, Bernd W SiguschAbstract:Objective To determine whether multiple examiners can demonstrate consistent plaque removal advantages for an oscillating–rotating power Toothbrush versus a manual Toothbrush. Methods This was a replicate-use, single brushing, examiner-blind, randomized, two-treatment, four-period crossover clinical trial involving four examiners. Subjects were randomized to one of four treatment sequences involving two Toothbrushes: an oscillating–rotating power Toothbrush or a manual Toothbrush. At each of the four visits, subjects arrived having abstained from oral hygiene for 24 h prior, and brushed with their assigned Toothbrush and a marketed fluoride dentifrice under supervision unaided by a mirror. Plaque was assessed by each examiner using the Turesky-Modified Quigley–Hein Plaque Index at each study period before and after brushing. Data was analysed separately for each examiner using the analysis of covariance for crossover design. Results Ninety-five subjects between the ages of 18 and 70 met the entrance criteria and were enrolled in the study. Eighty-seven subjects completed all four periods of the study. Both brushes delivered a significant plaque reduction when compared to baseline. Significant treatment differences were observed for all four examiners – ranging from 0.10 to 0.16 – in favor of the oscillating–rotating brush (P < 0.001). There were no adverse events reported or observed for either brush. Conclusions All four examiners demonstrated the power Toothbrush removed significantly more plaque after a single brushing than the standard manual Toothbrush. Both brushes were well tolerated.
-
efficacy of 3 Toothbrush treatments on plaque removal in orthodontic patients assessed with digital plaque imaging a randomized controlled trial
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2013Co-Authors: Christina Erbe, J M Grender, Hans Timm, Malgorzata Klukowska, Iris Tsaknaki, Heinrich WehrbeinAbstract:Introduction Good oral hygiene is a challenge for orthodontic patients because food readily becomes trapped around the brackets and under the archwires, and appliances are an obstruction to mechanical brushing. The purpose of this study was to compare plaque removal efficacy of 3 Toothbrush treatments in orthodontic subjects. Methods This was a replicate-use, single-brushing, 3-treatment, examiner-blind, randomized, 6-period crossover study with washout periods of approximately 24 hours between visits. Forty-six adolescent and young adult patients with fixed orthodontics from a university clinic in Germany were randomized, based on computer-generated randomization, to 1 of 3 treatments: (1) oscillating-rotating electric Toothbrush with a specially designed orthodontic brush head (Oral-B Triumph, OD17; Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, Ohio); (2) the same electric Toothbrush handle with a regular brush head (EB25; Procter & Gamble); and (3) a regular manual Toothbrush (American Dental Association, Chicago, Ill). The primary outcome was the plaque score change from baseline, which we determined using digital plaque image analysis. Results Forty-five subjects completed the study. The differences in mean plaque removal (95% confidence interval) between the electric Toothbrush with an orthodontic brush head (6% [4.4%-7.6%]) or a regular brush head (3.8% [2.2%-5.3%]) and the manual Toothbrush were significant ( P P = 0.007) to the regular brush head. No adverse events were seen. Conclusions The electric Toothbrush, with either brush head, demonstrated significantly greater plaque removal over the manual brush. The orthodontic brush head was superior to the regular head.
