Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 27, 2026
Design, Instrumentation and Usage Protocols for Distributed In Situ Thermal Hot Spots Monitoring in Electric Coils using FBG Sensor Multiplexing
Published on: March 8, 2020
Efficacy of electric-powered cleaning instruments in edentulous patients with implant-supported full-arch fixed
Toru Maeda1, Taro Mukaibo2, Chihiro Masaki1
1Division of Oral Reconstruction and Rehabilitation, Kyushu Dental University, 2-6-1 Manazuru, Kokurakita-Ku, Kitakyushu City, Fukuoka, 803-8580, Japan.
Background:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the plaque removal efficacies of electric toothbrushes and electric dental floss compared with conventional manual toothbrushing in cleaning the fitting surface of an All-on-4™ concept (Nobel Biocare, Zürich-Flughafen, Switzerland) implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis (FDP).
Methods:
Nine patients with maxillary edentulous arches participated in the study. We investigated two electric-powered brushes (Sonicare Diamond Clean®, Koninklijke Philips N.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands [SD group], and the Oral-B Professional Care Smart Series 5000®, Braun GmbH, Kronberg, Germany [OralB group]) and one electric dental floss unit (Air Floss®, Koninklijke Philips N.V. [AF group]). A manual toothbrush (Tuft24® MS, OralCare Inc., Tokyo, Japan) was used by the control group. The fitting surface of the FDP was stained to allow visualization of the entire accumulated plaque area. Both the buccal and palatal portions of the plaque area were assessed before and after brushing to evaluate each instrument's plaque removal rate using a crossover study design. Two-week washout periods were employed between each evaluation.
Results:
The plaque removal rates were 53.5 ± 8.5%, 70.9 ± 6.5%, 75.4 ± 6.3%, and 74.4 ± 4.2% for the control, AF, OralB, and SD groups, respectively. When participants were divided into two groups based on their plaque removal rates with a manual toothbrush (poor brushing and good brushing), the poor brushing group showed significant improvement in the plaque removal rate when using electric-powered toothbrushes. The plaque removal rates for the buccal area were significantly higher for the OralB and SD groups than for the manual brushing group (control group), with rates of 52.8 ± 7.9%, 70.1 ± 7.3%, 77.7 ± 6.5%, and 79.5 ± 3.7% for the control, AF, OralB, and SD groups, respectively. The plaque removal rates in the palatal area were consistently lower than those in the buccal area for each of the three electric instruments.
Conclusions:
The results suggest that patients who are not adept at manual toothbrushing may potentially improve their removal of plaque from the fitting surfaces of FDPs by using electric toothbrushes.
Related Concept Videos
01:07Electrical Power
01:16Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
01:10The Arch of Aorta
Encircling the heart, the coronary arteries form a ring-like structure before...
02:36Nuclear Power
Nuclear Fuels
Nuclear fuel consists of a fissile isotope, such as uranium-235, which must be present in sufficient quantity to provide a...
01:15Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
01:30Cleaning, Sterilization, and Disinfection
Cleaning
The cleaning process usually involves using water with detergents or enzymatic cleaner and removing foreign material from objects and surfaces, including organic material such as body fluids or inorganic material like soil. Cleaning is performed before high-level disinfection and sterilization because foreign materials on the cover of the devices interfere with process...