A comparative 3-month clinical investigation of the safety and efficacy of a battery-operated and a rechargeable oscillating-rotating power toothbrush.

PURPOSE: To compare the safety and efficacy of two oscillating-rotating power toothbrushes, the rechargeable Braun Oral-B D8 and the battery-powered Colgate Actibrush. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a randomized, examiner-blind, parallel-group study, carried out over 3 months of product use, involving a total of 113 healthy subjects with a plaque score of > or = 1.5 and a gingivitis score of > or = 1.1. Subjects were given written and verbal instructions in the use of their respective power brushes and were told to brush twice per day. At baseline, hard and soft tissues were examined, and plaque scores and gingival scores were recorded after 12-18 hrs of no oral hygiene. Subjects returned after 3 months, at which time soft and hard tissues were re-examined and plaque and gingivitis scores were recorded. RESULTS: No evidence was found of soft or hard tissue trauma and both brushes were considered to be safe when used according to the manufacturers' instructions. After 3 months, whole mouth plaque scores had decreased by 7% in the D8 group but had increased by 4.3% in the Actibrush group. The decrease from baseline in the D8 group was statistically significant, but the increase in the Actibrush group was not. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant both for the whole mouth and all individual sites. Whole mouth gingivitis scores were also reduced significantly from baseline in both groups, by 22.5% in the D8 group and by 17.5% in the Actibrush group. For whole mouth scores and all individual sites (interproximal, buccal and lingual), the D8 was significantly more effective than the Actibrush.

Anticalculus efficacy of an antiseptic mouthrinse containing zinc chloride.

BACKGROUND: The authors undertook a controlled clinical study to determine the efficacy of a tartar-control antiseptic mouthrinse in inhibiting the development of supragingival dental calculus. METHODS: After undergoing a dental prophylaxis, 334 subjects with a moderate rate of calculus formation were stratified and randomly assigned to one of three groups: positive control (using a tartar-control toothpaste and an antiseptic rinse), negative control (using a regular toothpaste and an antiseptic mouthrinse) or experimental (using a regular dentifrice and a tartar-control mouthrinse). Subjects brushed and rinsed twice daily, unsupervised, for four months. The researchers assessed subjects' calculus levels using the Volpe-Manhold Index, or VMI, after 16 weeks. RESULTS: Using analysis of covariance, the authors found that both the experimental group (which used a tartar-control rinse containing zinc chloride) and the positive control group (which used a tartar-control dentifrice containing pyrophosphate) demonstrated statistically significantly lower VMI scores (P = .001) than the negative control group (which used a regular dentifrice and an antiseptic rinse). Both anticalculus agents provided a clinically relevant 21 percent reduction in calculus formation. CONCLUSION: An antiseptic mouthrinse containing 0.09 percent zinc chloride as the anticalculus agent provides a clinically relevant reduction in calculus formation in people with a moderate rate of such formation. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A tartar-control mouthrinse with zinc chloride as the tartar-control ingredient is clinically effective in reducing the formation of calculus.

A single-use and 3-month clinical investigation of the comparative efficacy of a battery-operated power toothbrush and a manual toothbrush.

PURPOSE: To compare the safety and efficacy of a manual toothbrush and a battery-operated power toothbrush in two separate studies, one utilizing a single-use design and the other a 3-month parallel-group design. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The toothbrushes compared in the two studies were the Oral-B CrossAction manual toothbrush and the Colgate Actibrush battery-operated power toothbrush. The single-use study, which used a single-blind, cross-over design, involved 71 healthy subjects, who were instructed to abstain from oral hygiene for 23-25 hours prior to brushing with each of the two toothbrushes. Plaque was measured using the Proximal Marginal Index (PMI) pre- and post-brushing. The 3-month parallel-group study involved a total of 113 subjects who had plaque (PMI), gingivitis and bleeding (Loe and Silness) scored at baseline and after 1 and 3 months of product use. RESULTS: In both studies, the two toothbrushes were found to be safe. In the single-use study, significantly greater amounts of plaque were removed by the CrossAction manual toothbrush than by the Actibrush for the whole mouth as well as for marginal and approximal sites (P < 0.001). In the 3-month study, significantly greater plaque reduction was achieved with the CrossAction brush, the advantage being significant at 1 month for all sites except lingual sites (P < 0.05). At 3 months, there were consistent numerical advantages in favor of the CrossAction at all sites except lingual sites. Reductions in gingivitis were found to be similar with both toothbrushes.