Trial reportPloS one2021
Efficacy of a sonic toothbrush on plaque removal-A video-controlled explorative clinical trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative effects of bioelectric and manual toothbrushing on acrylic denture teeth: Surface integrity and wear analysis.PloS one · 2026Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical studies on the efficacy of sonic toothbrushes show inconsistent results, most studies have been conducted without sufficient supervision of appropriate toothbrush usage. Aims of the explorative clinical trial were therefore to investigate whether the usage of an activated sonic toothbrush reduces plaque more effectively than an inactivated one used as a manual toothbrush, and to which extent the correct use of such toothbrush plays a role in its efficacy. The clinical trial was designed as a video-controlled interventional study. Thirty participants (mean (±SD) age 22.9 (±2.5) years) were included, areas of interest were the buccal surfaces of the upper premolars and the first molar (partial mouth recording). Toothbrushing was performed without toothpaste in a single brushing exercise under four different conditions: switched off, habitually used as manual toothbrush, no instruction; switched on, habitually used as powered toothbrush, no instruction; switched off, used as manual toothbrush, instruction in the Modified Bass Technique; switched on, used as powered toothbrush, instruction in a specific technique for sonic toothbrushes. Brushing performance was controlled by videotaping, plaque was assessed at baseline (after 4 days without toothbrushing) using the Rustogi modified Navy-Plaque-Index and planimetry. Main study results were that plaque decreased distinctly after habitual brushing regardless of using the sonic brush in ON or OFF mode (p for all comparisons < 0.001). After instruction, participants were able to use the sonic brush in ON mode as intended, with only minor impact on efficacy. Using the toothbrush in OFF mode with the Modified Bass Technique was significantly less effective than all other conditions (p for all comparisons < 0.001). Under the conditions used, the sonic toothbrush was not more effective when switched on than when switched off, and there was no evidence that the correct use of the toothbrush was more effective than the habitual use.
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.