International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 2 ( March-April, 2019 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Comparative Evaluation of Plaque Removal Effectiveness of Manual and Chewable Toothbrushes in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Gurusamy Kayalvizhi, Sarangapani Radha, Venkatesan Ramesh, Selva B Arumugam

Keywords : Chewable, Dental plaque index, Gingivitis, Oral health, Oral hygiene, Randomized clinical trial

Citation Information : Kayalvizhi G, Radha S, Ramesh V, Arumugam SB. Comparative Evaluation of Plaque Removal Effectiveness of Manual and Chewable Toothbrushes in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019; 12 (2):107-110.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1604

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-09-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Abstract

Objective: In children, manual dexterity poses a problem with the use of manual tooth brushes (MB), resulting in inefficient plaque removal. Recently, novel chewable brushes (CB) have been introduced which could overcome this problem but are less researched in children. The objective of this study is to assess and compare the plaque removal effectiveness of CB with that of MB. Materials and methods: A total of 60 patients aged 8 to 10 years were enrolled in a single-blinded randomized clinical trial. At baseline, disclosing solution was applied and the Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein index (TQHI) plaque index and Loe and Silness gingival index were recorded. The subjects were randomly divided into two groups as group I (MB) and group II (CB) and they were instructed to use their respective brushes for a period of 1 week. For statistical comparison, the difference (prebrushing minus postbrushing) in average scores was calculated. Data were evaluated by the independent t test and paired t test, with p < 0.05. Results: The overall plaque scores reduced from 1.71 ± 0.4 to 0.79 ± 0.24 when using CB and from 1.64 ± 0.64 to 1.13 ± 0.47 when using MBs. On lingual tooth surfaces, CB showed a plaque reduction of 38.70 ± 11.04 to 12.60 ± 4.79 compared to less reduction from 37.43 ± 14.26 to 28.73 ± 11.37 for MB. The overall gingival scores were also reduced from 0.33 ± 0.51 to 0.09 ± 0.07 when using CB and from 0.30 ± 0.33 to 0.19 ± 0.23 when using MB. Differences in scores between the two brushes were statistically significant (p = 0.0001). Conclusion: It was concluded that the experimental CB was able to remove a significant amount of plaque, particularly on the lingual surfaces, and reduced gingival index scores, thereby improving oral hygiene and gingival health status.


PDF Share
  1. Malekafzali B, Biria M, et al. Plaque removal by manual and electric toothbrushing among children. EMHJ 2011;17(2):115–120.
  2. Costa CC, Filho C, et al. Plaque removal by manual and electric toothbrushing among children. Pesqui Odontol Bras 2001;15(4):296–301. DOI: 10.1590/S1517-74912001000400005.
  3. Das UM, Singhal P. Tooth brushing skills for the children aged 3–11 years. J Indian Soc Pedod Prevent Dent 2009;27(2):104–107. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.55335.
  4. Bezgin T, Dag C, et al. How effective is a chewable brush in removing plaque in children? A pilot study. J Pediatr Dent 2015;3:41–45. DOI: 10.4103/2321-6646.155557.
  5. Silverman J, Rosivack G, et al. Comparison of Powered and Manual Toothbrushes for Plaque Removal by 4- to 5-year-old Children. Pediatr Dent 2004;26:225–230.
  6. Myoken Y, Yamane Y, et al. Plaque removal with an experimental chewable toothbrush and a control manual toothbrush in a caredependent elderly population: a pilot study. J Clin Dent 2005;16:83–86.
  7. Damle SG, Patil A, et al. Effectiveness of supervised toothbrushing and oral health education in improving oral hygiene status and practices of urban and rural school children: a comparative study. J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent 2014;4:175–181. DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.142021.
  8. Joybell C, Krishnan R, et al. Comparison of Two Brushing Methods- Fone's vs Modified Bass Method in Visually Impaired Children Using the Audio Tactile Performance (ATP) Technique. JCDR 2015;9(3):19–22. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/11307.5651.
  9. Harnacke D, Mitter S, et al. Improving oral hygiene skills by computerbased training: a randomized controlled comparison of the modified Bass and the Fones techniques. PLoS One 2012;7(5):1–7. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037072.
  10. Alse ASS, Anandkrishna L, et al. Educational intervention on the plaque score among hearing impaired children. J Adv Clin Res Insights 2015;1:1–5. DOI: 10.15713/ins.jcri.37.
  11. Jayanthi M, Shilpapriya M, et al. Efficacy of three-tone disclosing agent as an adjunct in caries risk assessment. Contemp Clin Dent 2015;6:358–363. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.161887.
  12. Bastiaan RJ. The cleaning efficiency of different toothbrushes in children. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13:837–840. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600- 051X.1986.tb02239.x.
  13. Zimmer S, Dider B, et al. Clinical study on the plaque removing ability of a new triple headed toothbrush. J Clin Periodontol 1999;26:281–285. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-051X.1999.260503.x.
  14. Wolff D, Pioch T, et al. Effect of a crossover design on the 24-hour plaque regrowth. Int Poster J Dent Oral Med 2005;3:279.
  15. Sharma A, Arora R, et al. Clinical evaluation of the Plaque removing Ability of Four Different Toothbrushes in Visually Impaired Children. Oral Health Prev Dent 2012;10:1–6.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.