ArticleInternational dental journal2024
Safety and Clinical Evaluation of a Sonic Tongue Brush.
Article in International dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of tongue hygiene instruction on periodontal patients: an experimental study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTongue coating consists of oral bacteria, desquamated epithelium, blood cells, and food residues and is involved in periodontal disease, halitosis, and aspiration pneumonia. Recently, a tongue brush with sonic vibration was developed to clean the tongue. This comparative study examined the extent of tongue coating, its effects on the tongue, bacterial count particularly on the posterior dorsum of the tongue, and the degree of pain using a manual tongue brush and the newly developed sonic tongue brush. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients' extent of tongue coating and the quantity of bacteria were analysed before and after brushing with a sonic or manual nylon tongue brush. Moreover, the impressions of the dorsum linguae were obtained before and after brushing to establish models that were observed under a stereo microscope to evaluate tongue trauma. Pain caused during the use of these brushes was evaluated based on the numerical rating scale (NRS).
resultsThe extent of tongue coating and number of bacteria decreased in both the sonic and manual nylon brush groups after tongue cleaning; however, no significant differences were noted. Tongue trauma evaluation revealed that the tongue surface was significantly scratched in the manual brush group compared with the sonic brush group. NRS-based pain evaluation revealed no significant differences.
conclusionsThe sonic brush was equally effective in removing tongue coating and bacteria compared with the manual brush. As the sonic brush does not cause tongue trauma, it may be considered a safe and effective cleaning tool of the tongue.
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.