Trial reportBMC oral health2018
A new tooth brushing approach supported by an innovative hybrid toothbrush-compared reduction of dental plaque after a single use versus an oscillating-rotating powered toothbrush.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Plaque removal using powered and manual toothbrushes in children with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness of the "CEME" oral health intervention program for preventing stroke-associated pneumonia in patients with post-stroke dysphagia: a randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Efficacy of an Electric Toothbrush With Monitor in Dental Plaque Removal: A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial.Cureus · 2024Article
- In Vitro Efficacy of Domestic Techniques for Disinfection of Toothbrushes Contaminated WithInternational journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- Innovations in oral hygiene tools: a mini review on recent developments.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2024Review
- Dental Biofilm Removal and Bacterial Contamination of a New Doubled-Side Thermoplastic Polyurethane-Based Toothbrush: A Crossover Study in Healthy Volunteers.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Manual Toothbrush Versus Power Toothbrush in Reduction of Gingivitis: A Comparative Clinical Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2022Article
- Efficacy of a Hybrid Toothbrush versus Comparative Manual Toothbrush for Plaque Removal - Randomized In-Use Study.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2020Article
- Accidental Oral Injuries by Electric Toothbrush: A Report of Three Cases.Case reports in dentistry · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn innovative hybrid toothbrush was designed functioning either in manual mode, in powered mode (sonic) or in combined mode (manual and powered). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of this first hybrid toothbrush (Elgydium Clinic/Inava Hybrid) used in combined mode to a marketed oscillating-rotating powered toothbrush (Oral-B Vitality) in the reduction of dental plaque after a single use. The secondary aims were to evaluate the tolerance and acceptability of each device.
methodsIt was a randomized, examiner-blind, single-center study performed on two parallel groups: hybrid toothbrush (n = 33) versus oscillating-rotating toothbrush (n = 33). A brushing exercise was conducted for two minutes on subjects presenting a "Silness and Löe Plaque Index" (PI) between 1.0 and 2.0 and a "Modified Gingival Index" between 1.0 and 2.0. They were not to have ever used an electric toothbrush. To assess the device effect after brushing, a paired t-test was applied on the change outcome (After-Before brushing). An unpaired t-test was used to compare the efficacy of both devices. A global tolerance assessment of each powered toothbrush was done on all the subjects. The number and percentage of reactions related to each toothbrush was collected and the final tolerance assessment was estimated.
resultsAfter a single use, the hybrid toothbrush used in combined mode presented a global anti-plaque efficacy characterized by a significant decrease of the global PI of 45% on average (p < 0.0001; paired t-test). It was as effective as the oscillating rotating toothbrush in plaque removal (p > 0.05; unpaired t-test). The global tolerance of both toothbrushes was judged as "Good" and they were equally appreciated by the users.
conclusionThe results of this one-time use trial demonstrate the efficacy of the hybrid toothbrush used in combined mode for plaque removal. The hybrid toothbrush design allows each user to adapt tooth brushing to his preference (manual / sonic / combined), his skills or his mouth condition. We hypothesize that such an individualized approach can favor long term compliance with oral health recommendations and improve global oral wellness.
trial registrationISRCTN12394494 , 20/02/2018 - Retrospectively registered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.