Powered vs manual tooth brushing in fixed appliance patients: a short term randomized clinical trial

Cleaning performance of electric toothbrushes around brackets applying different brushing forces: an in-vitro study

Throughout treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances, effective plaque control is crucial to maintaining dental health. This in-vitro study evaluated the cleaning performance of eleven different brush heads of seven electric toothbrushes (oscillating-rotating and sonic motions) and varying brushing forces around orthodontic brackets. Six Mini Diamond® Twin brackets were placed on black-stained front teeth. Teeth were coated with white titanium oxide and brushed in a machine six times for one minute with two different brushing forces (1 N and 1.5 N). Eleven different brush heads were evaluated (either oscillating-rotating or sonic movements). The teeth were scanned and planimetrically evaluated after brushing. Three detailed plaque areas (DPAs) were created: proximal (< 1 mm to bracket), mid-tier (1-2 mm to bracket), and distant (> 2 mm to bracket). The proportion of contaminated proximal, mid-tier, and distant surfaces (white regions) in relation to the respective DPA was calculated. Independent of brushing forces, places with a higher distance (> 2 mm) to the orthodontic bracket had the least amount of residual contamination, followed by areas with a minor (1-2 mm) and proximal distance (< 1 mm). In all of the brushes tested and for both estimated brushing forces, the region with the highest residual contamination was the proximal area. The brush heads of the Paro® Sonic toothbrush left the least amount of residual contamination. The cleaning performance of electric toothbrushes around brackets on upper incisors varied across the brushes examined. The proximal area has the most residual contamination. Furthermore, 9 out of 11 toothbrushes cleaned more successfully with 1.5 N than with 1 N brushing force.

Biofilm formation following chitosan-based varnish or chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish application in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment: a double blinded randomised controlled trial

Background

Orthodontic treatment poses an increased risk of plaque accumulation and demineralisation of enamel leading to white spot lesion around the brackets. This parallel arm trial aims to assess the degree of bacterial plaque formation adjacent to orthodontic brackets, following the application of a chitosan-based varnish or chlorhexidene-fluoride varnish.

Methods

A total of 200 teeth from 20 patients undergoing fixed orthodontic therapy were assessed and biofilm formation around the brackets were recorded using the Bonded Bracket Index (Plaque index) at baseline and weekly for 6 weeks. The bacterial count and plaque pH at corresponding weekly intervals were also recorded. Following bracket bonding, the patients were cluster randomised to receive chitosan-based varnish-CHS (UNO Gel Bioschell, Germiphene corp., Brantford, Canada) or chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish-CFV (Cervitec F, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) every week on the representative teeth respectively. BBI proportions were compared between groups at all time intervals using Chi square test. Mean plaque bacterial count and plaque pH were compared using Mann Whitney U test and Tukey’s HSD test respectively.

Results

Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups: Mean age was CHS = 23 and CFV = 21; male to female ratio was CHS = 5/5, CFV = 7/3. At the end of 6 weeks, chitosan-based varnish performed equal to chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish (P > 0.05) with 98% and 95% of teeth with acceptable scores respectively. The plaque bacterial count significantly reduced at 6 weeks for both varnish compared to the baseline; The value for CHS was 0.43 ± 0.4 × 10⁴ and CFV was 0.77 ± 0.64 × 10⁴ CFU (P < 0.05), with no difference between both the varnishes. Both varnishes had no effect on the plaque pH that remained neutral.

Conclusion

This trial showed that both chitosan-based varnish and chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish reduced bacterial count, while the plaque pH remained neutral over a period of six weeks in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic therapy. The anti-plaque effects of the natural biopolymeric chitosan-based varnish was similar to that of chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish, a known chemotherapeutic agent.

Registration: This trial protocol was registered with https://www.ctri.nic.in (CTRI/2019/05/018896). (Date of registration 02/05/2019).

Protocol: The protocol was not published before trial commencement.

Comparative in vitro study of the cleaning efficacy of AirFloss ultra and I-Prox Sulcus brushes in an orthodontic phantom model

Preventing biofilm-related risks such as gingivitis and white spot lesions during orthodontic treatments is very challenging. The cleaning efficiencies of AirFloss Ultra and I-Prox P sulcus brushes were evaluated using an orthodontic phantom model. After attaching brackets onto black-coated maxillary KaVo teeth, a plaque substitute was applied. The evaluated tooth surfaces were divided into two areas. Cleaning was performed with an AirFloss Ultra with two (A-2) or four (A-4) sprays or an I-Prox P for two (I-2) or four (I-4) seconds. Images before and after cleaning were digitally subtracted, and the percentage of fully cleaned surfaces was determined (Adobe Photoshop CS5, ImageJ). Statistical analysis was performed by ANOVA and post hoc tests with Bonferroni correction (SPSS 25, p < 0.05). The mean values of total cleaning efficacy were 26.87% for I-2, 43.73% for I-4, 34.93%, for A-2 and 56.78% for A-4. The efficacy was significantly higher for A-4 than for A-2, I-4, and I-2. There were significant differences between the four groups. Repeated cleaning led to an improved result. Within the study limitations, the AirFloss Ultra with four sprays proved to be more efficient than the sulcus brush I-Prox P for cleaning.

Efficacy of Three Types of Plaque Control Methods During Fixed Orthodontic Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Aim:

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of three types of plaque control methods among 13- to 35-year-old subjects receiving fixed orthodontic treatment in Coorg Institute of Dental Sciences, Virajpet, Coorg district, Karnataka, India.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 111 subjects who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomly included in the study. The subjects were recalled after 1 month of the commencement of fixed orthodontic treatment for the recording of baseline data including plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and modified papillary bleeding index (MPBI). After recording of the baseline data, the subjects were randomly allocated into each of the intervention groups, i.e., group A (manual tooth brush), group B (powered tooth brush), and group C (manual tooth brush combined with mouthwash) by lottery method. Further, all the subjects were recalled after 1 and 2 months for recording the data.

Results:

Regarding plaque levels, it was seen that there was a highly statistically significant difference between the three groups (P = 0.001), with the manual tooth brush combined with chlorhexidine mouthwash group recording the lowest mean PI score of 0.5 ± 0.39. A comparison of the mean GI scores among the groups at the end of 2 months shows a highly statistically significant difference (P = 0.001). The mean MPBI scores at the end of 2 months were highly statistically significant among the three groups (P = 0.001), with the group C recording the lowest mean MPBI score of 0.3 ± 0.3.

Conclusion:

The powered tooth brush group subjects exhibited significantly lesser PI, GI, and MPBI scores than the manual tooth brush group at the end of 2 months, whereas the manual tooth brush combined with chlorhexidine mouth wash group subjects showed maximum improvement, having significantly lesser PI and GI scores than the powered tooth brush group.

Effectiveness of a motionless ultrasonic toothbrush in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of a motionless ultrasonic toothbrush to a manual toothbrush in reducing dental plaque, gingival inflammation, and mutans streptococci in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five orthodontic patients were recruited to this crossover study. The patients were randomized into two groups starting with manual or motionless ultrasonic toothbrushes for 30 days. After a 30-day washout period, the patients switched to the other toothbrush type for 30 days. Plaque and gingival indices were evaluated by two calibrated-blinded examiners before and after each 30-day period of brushing. Salivary samples were also collected for quantification of mutans streptococci.

RESULTS

On the bracket side, the motionless ultrasonic toothbrush showed a significantly higher mean plaque index bracket score after 30-day usage than baseline (P = .049), while the manual toothbrush group showed no difference between the before and after brushing periods (P = .10). The changes in plaque index bracket score were significantly more favorable in the manual toothbrush group than in the ultrasonic toothbrush group (P = .04). In contrast, no difference was observed on the nonbracket side. There was no significant difference in the changes of gingival index or the numbers of mutans streptococci between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Manual toothbrushing performed better than brushing with the motionless ultrasonic toothbrush in plaque removal on the bracket side in orthodontic patients. However, no difference was observed in terms of gingival status and the numbers of mutans streptococci.

Impact of Orthodontic Treatment on Periodontal Tissues: A Narrative Review of Multidisciplinary Literature

The aim of this review is to describe the most commonly observed changes in periodontium caused by orthodontic treatment in order to facilitate specialists' collaboration and communication. An electronic database search was carried out using PubMed abstract and citation database and bibliographic material was then used in order to find other appropriate sources. Soft and hard periodontal tissues changes during orthodontic treatment and maintenance of the patients are discussed in order to provide an exhaustive picture of the possible interactions between these two interwoven disciplines.

Comparison of Effectiveness of Manual Orthodontic, Powered and Sonic Toothbrushes on Oral Hygiene of Fixed Orthodontic Patients

Introduction: Maintenance of good oral hygiene is important for patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment.

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a manual orthodontic toothbrush, powered toothbrush with oscillating head and sonic toothbrush in controlling plaque, gingivitis and interdental bleeding in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment, and to compare their relative efficacy.

Materials and methods: Sixty subjects, who were to receive orthodontic treatment with both upper and lower fixed appliances, were randomly divided into three study groups, with 20 patients in each group. Groups I to III were given manual orthodontic, powered and sonic toothbrushes, respectively. Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI) and interdental bleeding index were scored to assess the level of plaque accumulation, gingival health and interdental bleeding at baseline; 4 and 8 weeks recall visits after fixed appliance bonding. Paired t-tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used for intragroup and intergroup comparisons. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results: This study showed that a significant reduction in all the three indices scores was found from baseline to 4 and 8 weeks in group III. On intergroup comparison, no statistically significant differences were detected between the three groups for any of the parameters assessed.

Conclusion: On intragroup comparison, sonic brushes performed superiorly in reducing gingivitis, plaque and interdental bleeding as compared to the manual orthodontic and powered brushes. On intergroup comparison, the relative comparative effectiveness was found to be similar for all the three brushes.

How to cite this article: Sharma R, Trehan M, Sharma S, Jharwal V, Rathore N. Comparison of Effectiveness of Manual Orthodontic, Powered and Sonic Toothbrushes on Oral Hygiene of Fixed Orthodontic Patients. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015;8(3):181-189.

Braces versus Invisalign®: gingival parameters and patients' satisfaction during treatment: a cross-sectional study

Background

Fixed orthodontic appliances (FOA) temporarily interfere with periodontal health of patients, as the appliance complicates oral hygiene. The use of aligners in orthodontic therapy increased strongly during the last decade. In the literature, the reports about effects of aligner treatment on oral hygiene and gingival conditions are scarce. This cross-sectional study evaluated oral hygiene and patient’s satisfaction during orthodontic treatment of patients with FOA or Invisalign®.

Methods

100 patients (FOA = 50, Invisalign® = 50) were included who underwent orthodontic treatment for more than 6 months. Clinical examinations were performed to evaluate patients’ periodontal condition and were compared with clinical data at the beginning of the orthodontic treatment. Oral hygiene, patients’ satisfaction and dietary habits were documented by a detailed questionnaire. For statistical analysis, the Mann–Whitney U-Test and Fisher’s Exact Test were used; as multiple testing was applied, a Bonferroni correction was performed.

Results

At the time of clinical examinations, patients with FOA were in orthodontic therapy for 12.9 ± 7.2 months, whereas patients with Invisalign® were in orthodontic therapy for 12.6 ± 7.4 months. Significantly better gingival health conditions were recorded in Invisalign® patients (GI: 0.54 ± 0.50 for FOA versus 0.35 ± 0.34 for Invisalign®; SBI: 15.2 ± 7.6 for FOA versus 7.6 ± 4.1 for Invisalign®), whereas the amount of dental plaque was also less but not significantly different (API: 37.7 % ± 21.9 for FOA versus 27.8 % ± 24.6 for Invisalign®). The evaluation of the questionnaire showed greater patients’ satisfaction in patients treated with Invisalign® than with FOA.

Conclusion

Patients treated with Invisalign® have a better periodontal health and greater satisfaction during orthodontic treatment than patients treated with FOA.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12903-015-0060-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Microbial contamination of toothbrushes during treatment with multibracket appliances

Introduction

It was aimed to assess the retention of caries-associated microorganisms on two different manual toothbrushes (conventional and tapered) and to evaluate the influence of multibracket appliances (MB) on the microbial contamination of the brush head.

Methods

50 MB-patients and 50 subjects without MB received a toothbrush (elmex® interX medium short head or meridol®) plus toothpaste (elmex®) for exclusive use and an information sheet with standardised brushing instructions. After 14 days of regular tooth brushing, the brushes were collected and sluiced in Sputasol solution. The suspension was incubated on selective agar plates and the amount of Streptococcus mutans, lactobacilli and Candida albicans for each brush head was assessed.

Results

Regarding the retention of microorganisms, no differences could be detected between the two bristle designs. However, the amount of S. mutans was significantly higher on brushes used by MB-patients (p < 0.005) than on the brushes of subjects without MB. The number of Lactobacilli and C. albicans was minimal in all cases and below statistical evaluation.

Conclusions

During treatment with MB appliances, toothbrushes were contaminated more intensely with S. mutans independent of bristle design. A more frequent replacement of toothbrushes may thus be recommended for patients undergoing MB-treatment.

Powered versus manual toothbrushing for oral health

BACKGROUND

Removing dental plaque may play a key role maintaining oral health. There is conflicting evidence for the relative merits of manual and powered toothbrushing in achieving this. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003, and previously updated in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To compare manual and powered toothbrushes in everyday use, by people of any age, in relation to the removal of plaque, the health of the gingivae, staining and calculus, dependability, adverse effects and cost.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 23 January 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 23 January 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 23 January 2014) and CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 23 January 2014). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of at least four weeks of unsupervised powered toothbrushing versus manual toothbrushing for oral health in children and adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Random-effects models were used provided there were four or more studies included in the meta-analysis, otherwise fixed-effect models were used. Data were classed as short term (one to three months) and long term (greater than three months).

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-six trials met the inclusion criteria; 51 trials involving 4624 participants provided data for meta-analysis. Five trials were at low risk of bias, five at high and 46 at unclear risk of bias.There is moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes provide a statistically significant benefit compared with manual toothbrushes with regard to the reduction of plaque in both the short term (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.70 to -0.31); 40 trials, n = 2871) and long term (SMD -0.47 (95% CI -0.82 to -0.11; 14 trials, n = 978). These results correspond to an 11% reduction in plaque for the Quigley Hein index (Turesky) in the short term and 21% reduction long term. Both meta-analyses showed high levels of heterogeneity (I(2) = 83% and 86% respectively) that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups.With regard to gingivitis, there is moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes again provide a statistically significant benefit when compared with manual toothbrushes both in the short term (SMD -0.43 (95% CI -0.60 to -0.25); 44 trials, n = 3345) and long term (SMD -0.21 (95% CI -0.31 to -0.12); 16 trials, n = 1645). This corresponds to a 6% and 11% reduction in gingivitis for the Löe and Silness index respectively. Both meta-analyses showed high levels of heterogeneity (I(2) = 82% and 51% respectively) that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups.The number of trials for each type of powered toothbrush varied: side to side (10 trials), counter oscillation (five trials), rotation oscillation (27 trials), circular (two trials), ultrasonic (seven trials), ionic (four trials) and unknown (five trials). The greatest body of evidence was for rotation oscillation brushes which demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in plaque and gingivitis at both time points.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Powered toothbrushes reduce plaque and gingivitis more than manual toothbrushing in the short and long term. The clinical importance of these findings remains unclear. Observation of methodological guidelines and greater standardisation of design would benefit both future trials and meta-analyses.Cost, reliability and side effects were inconsistently reported. Any reported side effects were localised and only temporary.

The prevalence of approximal caries in patients after fixed orthodontic treatment and in untreated subjects: a retrospective, cross-sectional study on bitewing radiographs

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this retrospective, cross-sectional study was to investigate the prevalence of approximal carious lesions in patients after fixed multibracket therapy and in subjects without orthodontics on bitewing radiographs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Bitewing radiographs of 104 orthodontically treated patients with fixed multibracket appliances were compared to those of 111 untreated subjects. The individuals in both groups were between 15 and 16.25 years of age when radiographs were taken. The test group with orthodontics was recruited from the archive of the Department of Orthodontics at the University of Zürich. The untreated control group was selected randomly from 16 communities in the Canton of Zürich. The approximal surfaces of the permanent premolars and molars of all subjects were assessed by two calibrated investigators.

RESULTS

The average number of enamel lesions in the test group after fixed orthodontic treatment was lower than in the control group (0.57 vs. 1.85, p < 0.001). The same was found for dentin lesions (0.06 vs. 0.49, p < 0.001). The distribution of lesions was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Fewer approximal carious lesions were detected in the test group after fixed multibracket appliances than in the age-matched control group without orthodontic treatment.