Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
Oral Health and Preventive Dentistry
OHPD Home Page
OHPD Pre-Print
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitter
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: OHPD

 

Oral Health & Preventive Dentistry

Edited by Jean-Francois Roulet, Poul Erik Petersen, Anton Sculean

Official journal of the World Congress of Minimally Invasive Dentistry

ISSN (print) 1602-1622 • ISSN (online) 1757-9996

Publication:

Fall 2012
Volume 10 , Issue 3



Pages: 219 - 224
PMID: 23094264
Back
Share Abstract:

Clinical Evaluation of the Plaque-removing Ability of Four Different Toothbrushes in Visually Impaired Children

Sharma, Asmita / Arora, Ruchi / Kenchappa, Mallikarjun / Bhayya, Deepak P. / Singh, Deepesh

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of plaque removal of four different toothbrushes in visually disabled children. Three manual toothbrushes with different bristle designs (Oral-B CrossAction 40-regular, Oral-B ShinyClean 40-soft, Oral-B Advantage 40-soft) were compared with an electric toothbrush with an oscillating rotating head (Colgate Motion).
Materials and Methods: Forty visually impaired children in a professional education center participated in the study and were divided into 4 groups of 10 participants each. To obtain a plaque-free condition at baseline, professional toothcleaning was performed on each participant. After instructions on how to use the toothbrushes, each group started the experiment using a differently designed toothbrush. After 1 week of application, the Quigley Hein plaque index (QHI) was used to assess the oral hygiene status of each participant. Student’s t-test was chosen for comparing brushes. P < 0.01 was considered as the significance level. Results were presented as mean standard deviation.
Results: The QHI values obtained with the electric Colgate Motion brush were the lowest (0.088 0.051) and Advantage (0.801 0.132) the highest. Although the QHI values with the manual Oral-B CrossAction (0.439 0.094) were lower than those with the Oral-B shiny clean (0.503 0.098), there was no statistical difference between the two.
Conclusion: The electric toothbrushes are still the most effective in the visually disabled group. However, because of cheaper cost, easier availability and use, the Oral-B CrossAction toothbrush with criss-cross bristles could be a suitable alternative.

Keywords: plaque, toothbrush, visually impaired

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
  © 2015 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog