Trial reportClinical oral investigations2024
Efficacy of an automatic electric toothbrush with nylon bristles in dental plaque removal: a cross-over randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cleansing efficacy of an auto-cleaning device versus an oscillating- rotating toothbrush in home use. A pilot study in individuals with down syndrome.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- Comparative in vitro study of a new silicone mouth swab for soft tissue cleaning under wet and dry brushing conditions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Application and effectiveness of experiential education combined with health coaching techniques in extended care for elderly patients with dental implants.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Article
- Innovations in oral hygiene tools: a mini review on recent developments.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2024Review
- Efficacy of the fully automated oral care robot with adjunctive MA-T gel for dental biofilm removal: A prospective crossover study.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this single-use, five-treatment, five-period, cross-over randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to compare the efficacy in dental plaque removal of a new Y-shaped automatic electric toothbrush (Y-brush) compared to a U-shaped automatic electric toothbrush (U-brush), a manual toothbrushing procedure (for 45 and 120 s), and no brushing (negative control). MATERIALS AND
methodsEligible participants were volunteer students randomized to the treatments in the five periods of the study. The primary outcome measure was the reduction in full-mouth plaque score (FMPS) after brushing while the secondary outcome variable was a visual analogic scale (VAS) on subjective clean mouth sensation. Mixed models were performed for difference in FMPS and VAS.
resultsAfter brushing procedures, manual toothbrushing (120 s) showed a statistically significant reduction in FMPS than Y-brush (difference 36.9; 95%CI 29.6 to 44.1, p < 0.0001), U-brush (difference 42.3; 95%CI 35.1 to 49.6, p < 0.0001), manual brushing (45 s) (difference 13.8; 95%CI 6.5 to 21.1, p < 0.0001), and No brushing (difference 46.6; 95%CI 39.3 to 53.9, p < 0.0001). Y-brush was significantly more effective than No brushing (difference 9.8; 95%CI 2.5 to 17.0, p = 0.0030), while there was no significant difference compared to U- brush. Similar results were obtained for the differences in the Clean Mouth VAS.
conclusionsY-brush was significantly more effective than no brushing (negative control) in removing dental plaque. When compared to manual toothbrushing for both 45 and 120 s, however, Y-brush was less effective in dental plaque removal. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Modified design of automatic toothbrushing devices could improve plaque reduction, especially in patients with intellectual disabilities or motor difficulties.
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.