Effects of ultrasonic, electric, and manual toothbrushes on subgingival plaque composition in orthodontically banded molars.

INTRODUCTION: Orthodontic appliances hinder mechanical plaque control. In this study, we evaluated the effect of self-performed supragingival plaque removal with ultrasonic, electric, and manual toothbrushes on subgingival plaque composition in orthodontically banded molars. METHODS: Twenty-one patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances were assigned to this single-blind crossover study. Samples of subgingival plaque were collected from banded molars, before and after each toothbrush usage period, for quantification of 22 bacterial species by the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization method. For each crossover, patients used a toothbrush for 30 days, followed by a washout period of 14 days. RESULTS: The prevalence of Tannerella forsythia decreased significantly after a month of electric brush usage. In the manual brush group, the prevalences of Selenomonas noxia, Streptococcus sanguinis, and Prevotella melaninogenica also decreased significantly. However, there were no significant differences in the prevalences and levels of bacteria after usage of the ultrasonic brush. Intergroup comparisons showed no statistical differences among the 3 brushes for the microbiologic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 brushes generally reduced bacterial prevalences, and, although electric and manual toothbrushes showed some isolated significant variations, we found no superiority with any toothbrush type when used three times daily for 2 minutes on microbiologic parameters in orthodontically banded molars.

Efficacy of ultrasonic, electric and manual toothbrushes in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances.

OBJECTIVE: This crossover study compared the efficacy of an ultrasonic toothbrush for the reduction of plaque, gingival inflammation, and levels of Streptococcus mutans, in relation to an electric and a manual toothbrush. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with orthodontic appliances were divided into three groups. All patients were evaluated by a periodontist and samples of saliva were collected for quantification of S mutans. The patients received their first brushes with appropriate instructions. For each crossover leg, patients used each toothbrush for a period of 30 days. At the end of each washout period, participants received a periodontal evaluation and new samples of saliva were collected. After 15 days of using their own toothbrushes, patients received the next toothbrushes in the experimental sequence. RESULTS: The ultrasonic brush group presented significant improvement in the reduction of visible plaque on the buccal surfaces (-6.36%, P = .007). The counts of S mutans decreased in the electric (2.04 x 10(5) to 1.36 x 10(5) colony-forming units [CFU]/mL) and ultrasonic (2.98 x 10(5) to 1.84 x 10(5) CFU/mL) groups. There were no statistical differences among the three brushes for the clinical and microbiological parameters evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not demonstrate that the ultrasonic toothbrush was better in reducing gingival inflammation in adolescent orthodontic patients, but plaque scores were lowered on buccal surfaces of teeth with orthodontic brackets. In addition, S mutans counts were markedly decreased in the electric and ultrasonic groups, which should be related to a reduced risk of oral disease.