Mathias Keller1, Gregor Keller1, Thomas Eller1, Lukas Sigwart1, Vera Wiesmüller1, René Steiner1, Vincent Offermanns2, Ines Kapferer-Seebacher3. 1. Department of Operative and Prosthetic Dentistry, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. 2. Private Practice , Die Kieferchirurgen", Austraße 51, 6122, Fritzens, Austria. 3. Department of Operative and Prosthetic Dentistry, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. Ines.Kapferer@i-med.ac.at.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the cleansing efficacy of an auto-cleaning device with nylon bristles (Y-brush®) to that of manual toothbrushing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty probands refrained from oral hygiene for 3 days. Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index was assessed before and after (randomized) toothbrushing either with the auto-cleaning device for 5 s per jaw or with a manual toothbrush for a freely chosen time up to 4 min. The clinical investigation was repeated in a cross-over design. In a third trial period, the brushing time for auto-cleaning was increased to 15 s per jaw. The study was supplemented by plaster cast analyses. RESULTS: Full-mouth plaque reduction was higher with manual toothbrushing than with auto-cleaning for 5 s per jaw (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference on smooth tooth surfaces but on marginal and interdental sites. Increasing the brushing time of auto-cleaning to 15 s per jaw resulted in a comparable full-mouth plaque reduction as with manual toothbrushing (p = 0.177). In 95% of individuals, the device was too short not completely covering second molars. In 30.67% of teeth, the gingival margin was not covered by bristles. CONCLUSIONS: Auto-cleaning devices with nylon bristles have a future potential to reach plaque reduction levels comparable to manual toothbrushing, although manufacturers must focus on improving an accurate fit. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Under the premise of an ameliorated fit, the auto-cleaning device might be recommendable for people with low brushing efficacy. Interdental sites remain a failure point if adjunct interdental cleaning is not viable.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the cleansing efficacy of an auto-cleaning device with nylon bristles (Y-brush®) to that of manual toothbrushing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty probands refrained from oral hygiene for 3 days. Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index was assessed before and after (randomized) toothbrushing either with the auto-cleaning device for 5 s per jaw or with a manual toothbrush for a freely chosen time up to 4 min. The clinical investigation was repeated in a cross-over design. In a third trial period, the brushing time for auto-cleaning was increased to 15 s per jaw. The study was supplemented by plaster cast analyses. RESULTS: Full-mouth plaque reduction was higher with manual toothbrushing than with auto-cleaning for 5 s per jaw (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference on smooth tooth surfaces but on marginal and interdental sites. Increasing the brushing time of auto-cleaning to 15 s per jaw resulted in a comparable full-mouth plaque reduction as with manual toothbrushing (p = 0.177). In 95% of individuals, the device was too short not completely covering second molars. In 30.67% of teeth, the gingival margin was not covered by bristles. CONCLUSIONS: Auto-cleaning devices with nylon bristles have a future potential to reach plaque reduction levels comparable to manual toothbrushing, although manufacturers must focus on improving an accurate fit. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Under the premise of an ameliorated fit, the auto-cleaning device might be recommendable for people with low brushing efficacy. Interdental sites remain a failure point if adjunct interdental cleaning is not viable.
Authors: Nam Rosema; D E Slot; W H van Palenstein Helderman; L Wiggelinkhuizen; G A Van der Weijden Journal: Int J Dent Hyg Date: 2014-12-25 Impact factor: 2.477
Authors: Falk Schwendicke; Christian H Splieth; Peter Bottenberg; Lorenzo Breschi; Guglielmo Campus; Sophie Doméjean; Kim Ekstrand; Rodrigo A Giacaman; Rainer Haak; Matthias Hannig; Reinhard Hickel; Hrvoje Juric; Adrian Lussi; Vita Machiulskiene; David Manton; Anahita Jablonski-Momeni; Niek Opdam; Sebastian Paris; Ruth Santamaria; Hervé Tassery; Andrea Zandona; Domenick Zero; Stefan Zimmer; Avijit Banerjee Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Maurizio S Tonetti; Peter Eickholz; Bruno G Loos; Panos Papapanou; Ubele van der Velden; Gary Armitage; Philippe Bouchard; Renate Deinzer; Thomas Dietrich; Frances Hughes; Thomas Kocher; Niklaus P Lang; Rodrigo Lopez; Ian Needleman; Tim Newton; Luigi Nibali; Bernadette Pretzl; Christoph Ramseier; Ignacio Sanz-Sanchez; Ulrich Schlagenhauf; Jean E Suvan Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 8.728
Authors: Iain L C Chapple; Fridus Van der Weijden; Christof Doerfer; David Herrera; Lior Shapira; David Polak; Phoebus Madianos; Anna Louropoulou; Eli Machtei; Nikos Donos; Henry Greenwell; Ari J Van Winkelhoff; Bahar Eren Kuru; Nicole Arweiler; Wim Teughels; Mario Aimetti; Ana Molina; Eduardo Montero; Filippo Graziani Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 8.728
Authors: N P T Innes; C H Chu; M Fontana; E C M Lo; W M Thomson; S Uribe; M Heiland; S Jepsen; F Schwendicke Journal: J Dent Res Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 6.116