使用电动牙刷或手动牙刷对有特殊护理需求儿童的口腔卫生和牙龈状况进行比较：一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

Comparison of Oral Hygiene and Gingival Outcomes in Children With Special Care Needs Using Powered or Manual Toothbrushes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

作者信息

Shaikh Anam A, Jawdekar Ashwin M, Saraf Tanvi A

机构信息

Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital Navi Mumbai, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

出版信息

Spec Care Dentist. 2025 Jan-Feb;45(1):e70000. doi: 10.1111/scd.70000.

DOI:10.1111/scd.70000

PMID:39865557

Abstract

AIM

This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) compares oral hygiene and gingival outcomes in children with special care needs (CSCNs) using powered or manual toothbrushes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two authors searched articles using PubMed and Cochrane library; the search was extended to other databases to include publications until July 2024. RCTs available in English were included. Oral hygiene and gingival outcomes in CSCNs, using powered or manual toothbrushes were: plaque index (PI), Quigley Hein plaque index (QHPI), gingival index (GI), and oral hygiene index simplified (OHI-S). ROB and publication bias was assessed using Cochrane tool and funnel plots, respectively. Meta-analyses were performed using forest plots. GRADE was used for the quality.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in SR and 11 studies in MA. In relation to GI and in the subgroup analysis of QHPI, powered toothbrushing was superior to manual toothbrushing with SMD -0.681 [95% CI (-0.911 to -0.451)] and SMD -0.85 [95% CI (-1.166 to -0.53)], respectively using REM. Comparisons with other indices exhibited no significant differences. The ROB and publication bias were moderate, quality of evidence was low to moderate GRADE.

CONCLUSION

Powered toothbrushes had favorable outcomes in a few but not all parameters. The overall quality of evidence is low.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION ID

CRD42024579260.

摘要

目的

本系统评价和荟萃分析（SRMA）比较了使用电动牙刷或手动牙刷的特殊护理需求儿童（CSCNs）的口腔卫生和牙龈健康状况。

材料与方法

两位作者使用PubMed和Cochrane图书馆检索文章；检索范围扩大到其他数据库，以纳入截至2024年7月的出版物。纳入英文的随机对照试验（RCTs）。CSCNs使用电动或手动牙刷的口腔卫生和牙龈健康状况指标包括：菌斑指数（PI）、Quigley Hein菌斑指数（QHPI）、牙龈指数（GI）和简化口腔卫生指数（OHI-S）。分别使用Cochrane工具和漏斗图评估研究偏倚风险（ROB）和发表偏倚。使用森林图进行荟萃分析。采用GRADE评估证据质量。

结果

系统评价纳入12项研究，荟萃分析纳入11项研究。在GI方面以及QHPI的亚组分析中，使用随机效应模型（REM），电动牙刷刷牙分别优于手动牙刷，标准化均数差（SMD）为-0.681 [95%置信区间（CI）（-0.911至-0.451）]和SMD为-0.85 [95%CI（-1.166至-0.53）]。与其他指标的比较无显著差异。研究偏倚风险和发表偏倚为中度，证据质量为低到中度GRADE。