Yankell S L, Emling R C
School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
J Clin Dent. 1997;8(4):120-3.
A 30-day study was conducted to compare a new powered toothbrush (Rowenta Plaque Dentacontrol Plus) with a standard manual ADA-approved toothbrush (Oral-B P35) and two marketed powered toothbrushes (Braun Oral-B Ultra and Sonicare) for safety, plaque area before and after toothbrushing with dentifrice, gingivitis and bleeding on probing. The three powered toothbrushes had label directions giving somewhat different times for brushing. It was presumed that these stated times were justified on the basis of some observations or measurements of thorough cleaning. One brush, the Rowenta, had labelled time requirements involving both a flat-surface brush and an interproximal brush head. The manual toothbrush came with no recommended time reference for brushing. It was thought to assess the relative efficacy of the four toothbrushes for plaque removal and soft tissue changes, if subjects were to follow label directions. The subjects used only their randomly assigned toothbrush during the study. Assessments at baseline and on days 15 and 30 were performed with the subjects having not brushed for 10-16 hours prior to the examination (overnight plaque formation). There were no side effects reported by the subjects or observed by the examiners attributed to toothbrush use at any time in the study. All groups had similar plaque levels at the beginning of the study and all toothbrushes removed statistically significant amounts of plaque after brushing. On gingivitis measurements at baseline, there were no significant statistical differences among the toothbrushes tested; however, by day 15 the Rowenta was significantly lower than the Braun group. By day 30, the Rowenta was statistically significantly lower than all the groups in gingivitis scores. For bleeding on probing assessments, there were no significant statistical differences among the toothbrush means at baseline or day 15. By day 30, the Rowenta was statistically significantly lower than the Oral-B P35 on this measurement. The Rowenta toothbrush significantly lowered the bleeding on probing scores from baseline to day 15 and from day 15 to day 30. The Braun, Sonicare and Oral-B P35 significantly lowered scores from baseline to day 30, but not from day 15 to day 30. The Rowenta toothbrush was found to be an effective device for the removal of plaque, and for significantly lowering gingivitis compared to the Braun, Sonicare and Oral-B P35 toothbrushes by the conclusion of the study. The Rowenta was significantly better than the Oral-B P35 manual toothbrush for reducing bleeding on probing over the 30 days of this study.
开展了一项为期30天的研究,比较一种新型电动牙刷(露华浓牙菌斑洁控加强版)与一款经美国牙科协会(ADA)批准的标准手动牙刷(欧乐-B P35)以及两款市售电动牙刷(博朗欧乐-B超感牙刷和飞利浦声波震动牙刷)在安全性、刷牙前后使用牙膏时的牙菌斑面积、牙龈炎及探诊出血方面的情况。三款电动牙刷的标签说明给出的刷牙时间略有不同。据推测,这些规定时间是基于一些关于彻底清洁的观察或测量而确定的。其中一款露华浓牙刷的标签时间要求涉及平面刷头和牙间隙刷头。手动牙刷没有附带推荐的刷牙时间参考。研究人员认为,如果受试者遵循标签说明,就能评估这四款牙刷在去除牙菌斑和软组织变化方面的相对功效。在研究期间,受试者仅使用随机分配给他们的牙刷。在基线以及第15天和第30天进行评估时,受试者在检查前10 - 16小时未刷牙(即过夜形成牙菌斑)。在研究过程中的任何时候,受试者均未报告副作用,检查人员也未观察到因使用牙刷导致的副作用。在研究开始时,所有组的牙菌斑水平相似,且所有牙刷在刷牙后去除的牙菌斑量在统计学上均有显著差异。在基线时的牙龈炎测量中,所测试的牙刷之间没有显著的统计学差异;然而,到第15天,露华浓组显著低于博朗组。到第30天,露华浓组在牙龈炎评分方面在统计学上显著低于所有组。在探诊出血评估方面,在基线或第15天,牙刷组之间没有显著的统计学差异。到第30天,在这项测量中,露华浓组在统计学上显著低于欧乐-B P35组。露华浓牙刷在从基线到第15天以及从第15天到第30天期间,探诊出血评分显著降低。博朗、飞利浦声波震动牙刷和欧乐-B P35在从基线到第30天期间评分显著降低,但从第15天到第30天期间没有降低。到研究结束时,发现露华浓牙刷是一种有效的去除牙菌斑的工具,与博朗、飞利浦声波震动牙刷和欧乐-B P35牙刷相比,能显著降低牙龈炎。在本研究的30天内,露华浓在减少探诊出血方面明显优于欧乐-B P35手动牙刷。