Powered versus manual toothbrushes for plaque removal and gingival health amongst 55 and older individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 0.9 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Special Care in Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-13 DOI:10.1111/scd.12974

Komal Kaur Saroya, Arpit Gupta, Richa Shrivastava, Nishant Mehta, Ashima Goyal

{"title":"Powered versus manual toothbrushes for plaque removal and gingival health amongst 55 and older individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Komal Kaur Saroya, Arpit Gupta, Richa Shrivastava, Nishant Mehta, Ashima Goyal","doi":"10.1111/scd.12974","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare manual and powered toothbrushes in older adults and to culminate available clinical evidence concerning efficiency with respect to plaque removal and reduced gingivitis.Background: Manual dexterity decreases with age, negatively impacting daily activities, including oral hygiene practices. Effective plaque control in this age group is directly related to nutrition and overall health. Therefore, developing oral health interventions tailored to the ageing population is essential.Material and methods: This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (Registration No. CRD42023415876). Five electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials published from inception until March 2023. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses were also performed for gingival, plaque, and bleeding indices.Results: A total of 2118 records were identified, and six eligible publications were retrieved. Comparison of Plaque Indices between powered and manual toothbrushes showed a Standard mean difference (SMD) of -0.10; 95% CI [-0.37, 0.18] (p = .38). Comparison of the gingival index and bleeding index between powered and manual toothbrushes showed an SMD of -0.28; 95% CI [-0.72, 0.16] (p = .22) and SMD of -0.03 [-0.38, 0.32] (p = .84), respectively.Conclusion: According to the available literature, this study suggests the need for more streamlined research to support the superiority of either powered or manual toothbrushes in improving oral health (as measured by the indices) among the older population. The results will hence have significant reverberations for older adults looking to improve their oral hygiene practices.","PeriodicalId":47470,"journal":{"name":"Special Care in Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Special Care in Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/scd.12974","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare manual and powered toothbrushes in older adults and to culminate available clinical evidence concerning efficiency with respect to plaque removal and reduced gingivitis.

Background: Manual dexterity decreases with age, negatively impacting daily activities, including oral hygiene practices. Effective plaque control in this age group is directly related to nutrition and overall health. Therefore, developing oral health interventions tailored to the ageing population is essential.

Material and methods: This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (Registration No. CRD42023415876). Five electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials published from inception until March 2023. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses were also performed for gingival, plaque, and bleeding indices.

Results: A total of 2118 records were identified, and six eligible publications were retrieved. Comparison of Plaque Indices between powered and manual toothbrushes showed a Standard mean difference (SMD) of -0.10; 95% CI [-0.37, 0.18] (p = .38). Comparison of the gingival index and bleeding index between powered and manual toothbrushes showed an SMD of -0.28; 95% CI [-0.72, 0.16] (p = .22) and SMD of -0.03 [-0.38, 0.32] (p = .84), respectively.

Conclusion: According to the available literature, this study suggests the need for more streamlined research to support the superiority of either powered or manual toothbrushes in improving oral health (as measured by the indices) among the older population. The results will hence have significant reverberations for older adults looking to improve their oral hygiene practices.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

电动牙刷与手动牙刷对 55 岁及以上人群牙菌斑清除和牙龈健康的影响：系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目的比较老年人使用手动牙刷和电动牙刷的情况，并总结现有的临床证据，以了解两者在清除牙菌斑和减少牙龈炎方面的效率：背景：随着年龄的增长，老年人的手部灵活性会下降，从而对包括口腔卫生习惯在内的日常活动产生负面影响。这个年龄段的人能否有效控制牙菌斑与营养和整体健康直接相关。因此，制定适合老龄人口的口腔健康干预措施至关重要：本系统综述已在 PROSPERO 注册（注册号：CRD42023415876）。对五个电子数据库进行了检索，以确定从开始到 2023 年 3 月发表的随机对照试验。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具对偏倚风险进行了评估。还对牙龈、牙菌斑和出血指数进行了元分析：结果：共发现 2118 条记录，检索到 6 篇符合条件的出版物。电动牙刷和手动牙刷的牙菌斑指数比较显示，标准平均差（SMD）为-0.10；95% CI [-0.37, 0.18] (p = .38)。电动牙刷和手动牙刷的牙龈指数和出血指数比较显示，标准差分别为-0.28；95% CI [-0.72, 0.16] (p = .22)和-0.03 [-0.38, 0.32] (p = .84)：根据现有文献，本研究表明需要进行更多的简化研究，以支持电动牙刷或手动牙刷在改善老年人口腔健康（以指数衡量）方面的优越性。因此，研究结果将对希望改善口腔卫生习惯的老年人产生重大影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Special Care in Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-

CiteScore

2.40

自引率

14.30%

发文量

120

期刊介绍： Special Care in Dentistry is the official journal of the Special Care Dentistry Association, the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for Persons with Disabilities, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry. It is the only journal published in North America devoted to improving oral health in people with special needs.