ArticleBritish dental journal2018
Whisky, microwave or hairdryer? Exploring the most efficient way to reduce bacterial colonisation on contaminated toothbrushes.
Article in British dental journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- In Vitro Efficacy of Domestic Techniques for Disinfection of Toothbrushes Contaminated WithInternational journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- The role of toothbrush in the transmission of corona- and influenza viruses - results of an in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Article
- Microorganisms populating the water-related indoor biome.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2020Review
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
Aims: It is the holiday season, but your toothbrush does not look very festive. It is damp and has been used and contaminated by someone else. To rectify this heinous crime, this study investigates the effectiveness of three household objects to disinfect toothbrushes. Design: In-vitro study performed under conditions simulating everyday life. Materials and methods: Twenty toothbrushes were contaminated using a mixture of saliva and trypticase soy broth containing Escherichia coli and Enterococcus faecalis. These contaminated toothbrushes were submerged in whisky, cooked in a microwave oven, or exposed to the hot air stream of a hairdryer, separately. Each treatment was performed on five toothbrushes for one minute. Untreated specimens (n = 5) served as controls. Toothbrushes were subsequently sonicated in sterile physiological saline, which was plated on selective agars. Bacterial counts were graded as low, medium, or high. Results: Residual contamination was influenced by the disinfectant applied, both in E. coli (p <0.001) and E. faecalis (p = 0.019). Microwave cooking achieved highest decontamination, while whisky had no significant effect on bacterial counts over no treatment (p = 0.8). Hot air showed some limited effectiveness under current conditions. Conclusions: Microwave oven cooking appears to be a simple, cheap, and effective way to reduce bacterial contamination of your toothbrush.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30547935What 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.