Suppr超能文献

青少年中手动牙刷与交互式电动牙刷在牙菌斑清除和刷牙依从性方面的比较评估:一项单中心、单盲随机对照试验。

A comparative assessment of plaque removal and toothbrushing compliance between a manual and an interactive power toothbrush among adolescents: a single-center, single-blind randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Erbe Christina, Klees Violetta, Ferrari-Peron Priscila, Ccahuana-Vasquez Renzo A, Timm Hans, Grender Julie, Cunningham Pamela, Adam Ralf, Farrell Svetlana, Wehrbein Heinrich

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.

Oral Care Department, Procter & Gamble Company, Kronberg, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Oral Health. 2018 Aug 3;18(1):130. doi: 10.1186/s12903-018-0588-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many adolescents have poor plaque control and sub-optimal toothbrushing behavior. Therefore, we compared the efficacy of an interactive power toothbrush (IPT) to a manual toothbrush (MT) for reducing dental plaque and improving toothbrushing compliance.

METHODS

In this randomized, parallel single-blind clinical study, adolescents brushed twice daily with either a MT (Oral-B® Indicator soft manual toothbrush) or an IPT (Oral-B® ProfessionalCare 6000 with Bluetooth). Subjects brushed for 2 min, plus an additional 10 s for each 'Focus Care Area'. At screening and Week 2, afternoon pre-brushing plaque was assessed via the Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TMQHPI), and supervised brushing duration was measured.

RESULTS

Sixty subjects were randomized; 98% completed. At Week 2, the mean reduction in whole mouth plaque relative to baseline was 34% (p < 0.001) for the IPT versus 1.7% (p = 0.231) for the MT. For Focus Care Areas, the IPT yielded a 38.1% mean TMQHPI reduction (p < 0.001) versus 6.2% for the MT (p < 0.001). Mean brushing time versus baseline increased 34 s in the IPT group (p < 0.001) while remaining flat in the MT group (p = 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Over 2 weeks, adolescents using an IPT experienced superior plaque reduction and increased overall brushing time versus those using a MT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was retrospectively registered ( ISRCTN10112852 ) on the 18th, June 2018.

摘要

背景

许多青少年牙菌斑控制不佳,刷牙行为也未达到最佳状态。因此,我们比较了一款交互式电动牙刷(IPT)与一款手动牙刷(MT)在减少牙菌斑和提高刷牙依从性方面的效果。

方法

在这项随机、平行单盲临床研究中,青少年每天使用MT(欧乐B® 指示型软毛手动牙刷)或IPT(带蓝牙功能的欧乐B® 专业护理6000型)刷牙两次。受试者刷牙2分钟,每个“重点护理区域”额外增加10秒。在筛查时和第2周,通过Turesky对Quigley-Hein菌斑指数的改良版(TMQHPI)评估下午刷牙前的菌斑情况,并测量监督下的刷牙时长。

结果

60名受试者被随机分组;98%完成了试验。在第2周时,IPT组全口牙菌斑相对于基线的平均减少率为34%(p < 0.001),而MT组为1.7%(p = 0.231)。对于重点护理区域,IPT组TMQHPI平均降低38.1%(p < 0.001),MT组为6.2%(p < 0.001)。IPT组的平均刷牙时间相对于基线增加了34秒(p < 0.001),而MT组保持不变(p = 1.0)。

结论

在两周时间里,使用IPT的青少年与使用MT的青少年相比,牙菌斑减少效果更佳,且总体刷牙时间增加。

试验注册

本试验于2018年6月18日进行回顾性注册(ISRCTN10112852)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/15d6/6091059/9d457d40b015/12903_2018_588_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验