ArticleClinical oral investigations2019
Influence of the amplitude of different side-to-side toothbrushes on noncontact biofilm removal.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Critical hydrodynamic force levels for efficient removal of oral biofilms in simulated interdental spaces.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Effect of Dentifrice Ingredients on Volume and Vitality of a Simulated Periodontal Multispecies Biofilm.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- Interdental biofilm reduction and composition after use of an activated and inactivated side-to-side toothbrush - a proof-of-principle clinical study.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Article
- Adjunct use of mouth rinses with a sonic toothbrush accelerates the detachment of a Streptococcus mutans biofilm: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the impact of the lateral deflection of toothbrush bristles (amplitude) of three side-to-side toothbrushes for noncontact biofilm removal in an artificial interdental space model. MATERIALS AND
methodsA three-species biofilm (Porphyromonas gingivalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Streptococcus sanguinis) was formed in vitro on protein-coated titanium disks. A flow chamber system was combined with a static biofilm growth model. The amplitudes of three commercial side-to-side toothbrushes were evaluated by means of a dose response analysis. The amplitudes were decreased in steps (100%, 85%, 70%, 55%, and 40%). Subsequently, the biofilm-coated substrates were exposed to the toothbrushes. The biofilms were analyzed with confocal laser scanning microscope images and measured using volumetric analyses.
resultsThe predictability of interdental biofilm reduction differed among the toothbrushes. A lower variety in the results of repeated experiments occurred in toothbrush C compared to toothbrushes A and B. Toothbrush C obtained highest percentage of biofilm reduction by 85% of amplitude power setting (median biofilm reduction 76%). Decreasing the amplitude from 85 to 40% resulted in reduced biofilm reduction (p = 0.029). In contrast, no significance could be observed for the differences of the tested amplitudes within toothbrushes A and B (p > 0.05). Between the toothbrushes, a significant difference in interdental biofilm reduction was found between C-A (p = 0.029) and C-B (p = 0.029) with amplitude of 85%.
conclusionsThe amplitude of one of the investigated side-to-side toothbrushes affected the biofilm reduction predictably in an interdental space model. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Within certain toothbrushes, a specific amplitude power setting may demonstrate beneficial effects on noncontact biofilm removal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30232623What OpenQuestion holds
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.