A PRACTICE-BASED RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF THE EFFICACY OF AN ELECTRIC AND A MANUAL TOOTHBRUSH ON GINGIVAL HEALTH IN PATIENTS WITH FIXED ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES
V. Clerehugh et al., A PRACTICE-BASED RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF THE EFFICACY OF AN ELECTRIC AND A MANUAL TOOTHBRUSH ON GINGIVAL HEALTH IN PATIENTS WITH FIXED ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES, Journal of dentistry, 26(8), 1998, pp. 633-639
Objectives. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy
of an electric toothbrush with a specially designed orthodontic brush
head compared with a manual toothbrush in controlling plaque and gingi
vitis in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances over an 8-week per
iod in a dental practice setting, Methods. This was a randomised contr
olled, single blind, stratified, parallel group trial conducted in two
specialist orthodontic dental practices by a specialist orthodontist.
Group 1 comprised 41 subjects who used the electric toothbrush and Gr
oup 2 consisted of 43 subjects who brushed with a manual toothbrush ar
ound the orthodontic appliance for a timed 2 minutes twice daily for 8
weeks. Plaque around the fixed appliance attachments was measured usi
ng an orthodontic modification to the Silness and Loe plaque index, wh
ile gingival condition was scored using the gingival index and Eastman
interdental bleeding index. Results. There was baseline balance for a
ll clinical variables (p > 0.05). Both groups had significantly less p
laque after 8 weeks than at baseline (p < 0.001) but the group using t
he electric brush also had significantly less interdental gingival ble
eding, as determined by the Eastman interdental bleeding index both at
week 4 (p < 0.001) and week 8 (p = 0.004). The majority of subjects (
n = 54, 64.3%) preferred the electric toothbrush. Conclusions. In conc
lusion, the results from this study would suggest that use of an elect
ric toothbrush with an orthodontic brush head may be of benefit in pro
moting gingival health in fixed orthodontic appliance patients; howeve
r, the long-term effects (over at least 6 months) need to be evaluated
. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.