Williams Karen, Rapley Kathy, Haun Jan, Walters Pat, Grender Julie, He Tao, Biesbrock Aaron R
University of Missouri at Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri, USA.
Am J Dent. 2010 Apr;23(2):60-4.
To assess the benefit of the power component of two power toothbrushes, with sonic and rotation-oscillation mechanisms, on plaque removal efficacy.
Two independent studies with identical designs were used to assess the benefit of the power component of two power toothbrushes, with sonic and rotation-oscillation mechanisms, on plaque removal efficacy. Each brush was tested with the power 'On' relative to a control of the same brush with the power 'Off' used like a manual toothbrush. The studies were carried out independently at different sites, and each employed a replicate use, single brushing, two-treatment, four-period, examiner-blind, randomized, crossover design for assessing plaque removal. Study 1 compared rotation-oscillation action (Oral-B Triumph with FlossAction brush head), and Study 2 compared sonic action (Sonicare FlexCare with ProResults standard brush head) with power on versus off. The two treatments in each study consisted of (1) brushing teeth per manufacturer's instructions of the power toothbrush and (2) brushing without power by using the power toothbrush like a manual toothbrush. Prior to the treatment phase of each study, subjects exclusively used the assigned study toothbrush for 2 minutes twice per day according to the manufacturer's instructions (power on) during an acclimation period. Plaque was scored at prebrushing (baseline) and post-brushing on Visits 2, 3, 4 and 5 using the Turesky Modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TMQHPI). A 2-day washout period separated each treatment period.
32 subjects were enrolled in each study; 28 subjects provided complete data for Study 1 and 32 subjects provided complete data for Study 2. The adjusted mean TMQHPI plaque removal scores for Study 1 were 0.793 for the rotation-oscillation 'On' regimen and 0.675 for the rotation-oscillation 'Off' regimen. This represents a statistically significantly (P<0.0001) greater plaque score reduction for the rotation-oscillation 'On' versus rotation-oscillation 'Off' treatment. The adjusted mean TMQHPI plaque removal scores for Study 2 were 1.042 for the sonic 'On' regimen and 1.007 for the sonic 'Off' regimen. This represents a nonsignificant (P=0.426) greater plaque score reduction for the difference between sonic 'On' versus sonic 'Off' regimen.
评估两种具有声波和旋转振荡机制的电动牙刷的动力组件对牙菌斑清除效果的益处。
采用两项设计相同的独立研究来评估两种具有声波和旋转振荡机制的电动牙刷的动力组件对牙菌斑清除效果的益处。每支牙刷在开启动力的情况下进行测试，并与将同一支牙刷关闭动力后像手动牙刷一样使用的对照组进行比较。研究在不同地点独立进行，每项研究均采用重复使用、单次刷牙、两种处理方式、四个阶段、检查者盲法、随机交叉设计来评估牙菌斑清除情况。研究1比较了旋转振荡模式（配备牙线清洁刷头的欧乐B智臻），研究2比较了声波模式（配备专业护理标准刷头的飞利浦声波震动牙刷）开启动力与关闭动力的情况。每项研究中的两种处理方式包括：（1）按照电动牙刷制造商的说明刷牙，（2）将电动牙刷像手动牙刷一样关闭动力刷牙。在每项研究的治疗阶段之前，受试者在适应期内按照制造商的说明（开启动力）每天使用指定的研究牙刷两次，每次2分钟。在第2、3、4和5次就诊时，使用Turesky改良的Quigley-Hein菌斑指数（TMQHPI）在刷牙前（基线）和刷牙后对牙菌斑进行评分。每个治疗阶段之间有2天的洗脱期。
每项研究招募了32名受试者；28名受试者为研究1提供了完整数据，32名受试者为研究2提供了完整数据。研究1中，旋转振荡模式开启时调整后的平均TMQHPI牙菌斑清除评分是0.793，旋转振荡模式关闭时为0.675。这表明旋转振荡模式开启相对于旋转振荡模式关闭的处理方式，牙菌斑评分降低在统计学上有显著差异（P<0.0001）。研究2中，声波模式开启时调整后的平均TMQHPI牙菌斑清除评分是1.042，声波模式关闭时为1.007。这表明声波模式开启与声波模式关闭的处理方式之间，牙菌斑评分降低差异不显著（P=0.426）。
