Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37189136›Full record

Trial reportBMC oral health2023

Effects of blue-light LED toothbrush on reducing dental plaque and gingival inflammation in orthodontic patients with fixed appliances: a crossover randomized controlled trial.

Chavirakarn Manphibool, Oranart Matangkasombut, Soranun Chantarangsu, Pintu-On Chantarawaratit

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chavirakarn ManphiboolDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Oranart MatangkasombutDepartment of Microbiology and Center of Excellence on Oral Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Soranun ChantarangsuDepartment of Oral Pathology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pintu-On ChantarawaratitDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. pintuon@gmail.com.
Chulalongkorn University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with fixed orthodontic appliances have higher plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of a light emitting diode (LED) toothbrush with a manual toothbrush in reducing dental plaque and gingival inflammation in orthodontic patients with fixed appliances, and to investigate the effect of the LED toothbrush on Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans) biofilm in vitro.

methodsTwenty-four orthodontic patients were recruited and randomly assigned into 2 groups: (1) started with manual and (2) started with LED toothbrushes. After a 28-day usage and 28-day wash-out period, the patients switched to the other intervention. The plaque and gingival indices were determined at baseline and 28 days after each intervention. The patients' compliance and satisfaction scores were collected using questionnaires. For the in vitro experiments, S. mutans biofilm was divided into 5 groups (n = 6) with 15-, 30-, 60-, or 120-sec LED exposure, and without LED exposure as a control group.

resultsThere was no significant difference in the gingival index between the manual and LED toothbrush groups. The manual toothbrush was significantly more effective in reducing the plaque index in the proximal area on the bracket side (P = 0.031). However, no significant difference was found between the two groups in other areas around the brackets or on the non-bracket side. After LED exposure in vitro, the percentages of bacterial viability after LED exposure for 15-120 s were significantly lower compared with the control (P = 0.006).

conclusionClinically, the LED toothbrush was not more effective in reducing dental plaque or gingival inflammation than the manual toothbrush in orthodontic patients with fixed appliances. However, the blue light from the LED toothbrush significantly reduced the number of S. mutans in biofilm when it was exposed to the light for at least 15 s in vitro. CLINICAL

trial registrationThai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR20210510004). Registered 10/05/2021.

Indexed as

Dental PlaqueGingivitisDental Plaque IndexHumansInflammationOrthodontic AppliancesOrthodontic Appliances, FixedSingle-Blind MethodStreptococcus mutansToothbrushingBiofilmDental plaqueFixed orthodontic applianceGingival indexGingival inflammationLED toothbrushOrthodontic patientPlaque indexStreptococcus mutans

Identifiers

PMID37189136
PMCPMC10184111
OpenAlexW4376643380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.