Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38520685›Full record

ArticleSpecial care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry2024

Pilot study of the effectiveness and acceptability of an automatic toothbrush among residents in long-term care.

Britteny M Howell, Shellea Trammell, Marin Livingston, Royann Royer

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Britteny M HowellDivision of Population Health Sciences, University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9724-5367
Shellea TrammellHealthy Smiles Forever, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Marin LivingstonDivision of Population Health Sciences, University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Royann RoyerHealthy Smiles Forever, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services · USUniversity of Alaska Anchorage · US

Funding

The Administrative CoreP20GM103395 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS · PI BRIAN M BARNES · 2012 to 2026
$66.1M
Center for Community Engagement and Learning, University of Alaska AnchorageInstitutional Development Award (IDeA) from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences P20GM103395NIGMS NIH HHSNIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103395University of Alaska Anchorage Center for Community Engagement & Learning
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsReduced mobility and/or low cognitive functioning may make it difficult for residents with special care needs in long-term care homes to brush their own teeth every day. Demands on caregiving staff in these homes may also result in skipping essential toothbrushing tasks, resulting in poor oral health. METHODS AND

resultsThis article provides the results of a 6-week pilot study that tested the effectiveness and acceptability of the Willo automatic toothbrush "robot" used among residents in long-term care compared to their regular toothbrush. Using a non-randomized delayed-start design with a convenience sample (age 38-82 years, mean = 66.9), each study participant underwent biofilm assessments at three timepoints: (1) baseline as the study began (mean = 2.33), (2) after using their regular toothbrush daily for 3 weeks (mean = 2.21), and (3) after using the Willo automatic toothbrush daily for 3 weeks (mean = 0.31). Using t-tests and repeated measures ANOVA, the Willo was significantly more effective than regular toothbrushing at reducing biofilm (p = .00004) and gingivitis (p = .002) over time. Participants also responded to brief weekly satisfaction surveys about their experiences using the two different brushes. The Willo was generally tolerated among participants, who largely reported that the brush was easy to use, not uncomfortable, and did not cause pain or bleeding. While approximately half of the study participants reported liking the Willo, the remainder did not want to replace their regular brush with the Willo, for a variety of reasons.

conclusionWe recommend more research on the effectiveness and acceptability of automatic toothbrushes with long-term care residents, caregivers, and others who may benefit from their use.

Indexed as

ToothbrushingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiofilmsDental PlaqueEquipment DesignFemaleHumansLong-Term CareMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsRoboticsattitudes/opinion surveysinstitutional dental carenursing home residents

Identifiers

PMID38520685
PMCPMC11417133
OpenAlexW4393111318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.