Trial reportClinical and experimental dental research2025
A Randomized Crossover Trial Assessing Plaque Regrowth Dynamics in Adults With Use of an Oscillating-Rotating Electric Toothbrush Versus a Manual Toothbrush Measured by Digital Plaque Image Analysis.
Trial report in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2025. 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.
- Effect of Continuous Nursing Based on IKAP Theory on Periodontal Indicators and Self-Management Ability of Patients With Periodontal Disease.International dental journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis randomized crossover trial involving adult participants with ≥ 10% plaque coverage on anterior teeth compared dental plaque regrowth dynamics between an oscillating-rotating (O-R) electric toothbrush and a manual toothbrush using Digital Plaque Imaging Analysis. MATERIAL AND
methodsThirty-four participants were randomized to one of 4 treatment sequences, each having four 8-day treatment periods. Participants brushed twice daily with the assigned toothbrush. Morning and afternoon plaque were evaluated on Days 1, 3, and 8. The primary variable was afternoon percent plaque coverage, using repeated measures analysis from Days 1, 3, and 8.
resultsThe O-R toothbrush produced lower mean plaque levels versus the manual toothbrush for all endpoints (p ≤ 0.001). The benefit for the O-R toothbrush increased over time, demonstrating 16.4% (p = 0.001) and 28.1% (p < 0.001) lower afternoon plaque levels on Days 1 and 8, respectively, compared to the manual brush. Trends were similar for morning plaque. Repeated measures analyses showed a 21.2% reduction in overall afternoon plaque and a 23.5% reduction in overall morning plaque for the O-R brush versus the manual brush (p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe O-R toothbrush controlled plaque regrowth better than a manual toothbrush and should be considered to reduce plaque-related diseases as part of a generalized prophylaxis and treatment plan.
trial registrationISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN 28649560.
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.