Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24641783›Full record

Trial reportThe Angle orthodontist2014

Combined effects of repeated oral hygiene motivation and type of toothbrush on orthodontic patients: a blind randomized clinical trial.

Ida Marini, Francesco Bortolotti, Serena Incerti Parenti, Maria Rosaria Gatto, Giulio Alessandri Bonetti

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Angle orthodontist, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03099551 (Randomized Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Two Different Toothbrushes on Plaque Control), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03099551 phase4unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Randomized Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Two Different Toothbrushes on Plaque Control

TypeinterventionalSponsorFaculty Sao Leopoldo Mandic CampinasRan2016 to 2017Enrolled56ConditionsPlaque, GingivitisArmsGroup using manual toothbrush Curaprox 5460 Ultra Soft, Group using sonic toothbrush Edel White
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Powered versus manual toothbrushing for oral health.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Efficacy of a mobile phone application for the improvement of oral hygiene of patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment : A randomized controlled clinical trial.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025
    Trial
  6. Manual vs. interactive power toothbrush on plaque removal and salivary Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus casei levels : Single-center, examiner-blinded, randomized clinical trial in orthodontic patients.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2024
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ida Marinia  Visiting Professor, Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Section of Orthodontics, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Francesco Bortolotti
Serena Incerti Parenti
Maria Rosaria Gatto
Giulio Alessandri Bonetti

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the effects on plaque index (PI) scores of manual or electric toothbrush with or without repeated oral hygiene instructions (OHI) and motivation on patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances. MATERIALS AND

methodsOne month after the orthodontic fixed appliance bonding on both arches, 60 patients were randomly assigned to four groups; groups E1 (n  =  15) and E2 (n  =  15) received a powered rotating-oscillating toothbrush, and groups M1 (n  =  15) and M2 (n  =  15) received a manual toothbrush. Groups E1 and M1 received OHI and motivation at baseline (T0) and after 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 weeks (T4, T8, T12, T16, and T20, respectively) by a Registered Dental Hygienist; groups E2 and M2 received OHI and motivation only at baseline. At each time point a blinded examiner scored plaque of all teeth using the modified Quigley-Hein PI.

resultsIn all groups the PI score decreased significantly over time, and there were differences among groups at T8, T12, T16, and T20. At T8, PI scores of group E1 were lower than those of group E2, and at T12, T16, and T20, PI scores of groups M1 and E1 were lower compared to those of groups M2 and E2. A linear mixed model showed that the effect of repeated OHI and motivation during time was statistically significant, independently from the use of manual or electric toothbrush.

conclusionsThe present results showed that repeated OHI and motivation are crucial in reducing PI score in orthodontic patients, independent of the type of toothbrush used.

Indexed as

MotivationOrthodontic AppliancesAdolescentCariostatic AgentsChildColoring AgentsDental CariesDental PlaqueDental Plaque IndexDouble-Blind MethodElectrical Equipment and SuppliesEquipment DesignFemaleFluoridesFollow-Up StudiesGingivitisCariostatic AgentsColoring AgentsFluoridesToothpastesElectric toothbrushManual toothbrushOral hygiene instructionsOral hygiene motivationOrthodontic appliances

Identifiers

PMID24641783
PMCPMC8641274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.