This study measured the ability of two powered toothbrushes (Crest SpinBrush and Crest SpinBrush Pro) to reduce gingivitis relative to baseline levels over a one-month period. This study made use of a randomized, controlled, examiner-blind, parallel design. Subjects were examined for Löe-Silness GI scores at baseline and at one month. The primary efficacy variable was GI score change at one month from the baseline GI score. Within-group comparisons to baseline were performed using paired t-tests. Secondarily, treatment group differences were examined using an analysis of covariance model, with baseline as the covariate. Separate analyses were performed for Löe-Silness GI scores and for the number of gingival bleeding sites. All comparisons were two-sided and used the 0.05 level of significance. A total of 87 subjects completed the study. Of these, there were 57 females and 30 males, ranging in age from 18 to 70 years with a mean age of 33.1 years. Baseline GI scores were 0.487 and 0.449 for the Crest SpinBrush and Crest SpinBrush Pro, respectively, and were not statistically significantly different. Both brushes demonstrated highly statistically significant reductions in GI vs. baseline (all p < 0.001), and delivered an approximately 60% reduction in GI. Baseline bleeding site scores were 37.6 and 34.4 for the Crest SpinBrush and Crest SpinBrush Pro, respectively, and were not statistically significantly different. Both brushes demonstrated highly statistically significant reductions in bleeding vs. baseline (all p < 0.001), and delivered an approximately 60% reduction in bleeding sites. None of the ANCOVA comparisons between brush groups were statistically significant (all p > or = 0.354). Both the Crest SpinBrush Pro and Crest SpinBrush powered toothbrushes were highly effective at reducing gingivitis when used per manufacturer's instructions.

Download full-text PDF

Source

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

crest spinbrush
32
spinbrush pro
16
spinbrush crest
12
baseline
9
one-month period
8
period study
8
powered toothbrushes
8
crest
8
spinbrush
8
löe-silness scores
8

Similar Publications

Objective: This randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted to assess the extrinsic stain reduction achieved by brushing with a whitening dentifrice and powered toothbrush, and to determine whether the addition of a whitening booster paste to this regimen would enhance its stain reducing effectiveness.

Methods: Sixty qualifying subjects were randomly assigned either to Regimen One, a whitening dentifrice (Arm & Hammer Truly Radiant [TR] toothpaste] and powered toothbrush (Arm & Hammer Truly Radiant [TR] Extra Whitening Spinbrush); Regimen Two, the dentifrice and powered toothbrush with the addition of a whitening booster; or Regimen Three, a negative control (Colgate Cavity Protection toothpaste and an ADA standard manual brush). They were instructed in the use of their assigned products and then brushed unsupervised at home for two minutes, twice daily, for 14 days.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Unlabelled: Power toothbrushes (PTBs), in combination with abrasive dentifrices, may encourage wear of dental cements at crown margins.

Purpose: The objective of this in vitro simulation was to control the clinical variables associated with PTB use and measure the potential side effects of PTBs with mild and abrasive dentifrices.

Methods And Materials: Four PTBs ( Braun-Oral-B-Professional Care at 150 g brushing force, Sonicare-Elite at 90 g, Colgate-Actibrush at 200 g and Crest-Spinbrush-Pro at 250 g) and 2 dentifrices mixed 1:1 with tap water (Mild= Colgate-Total, Colgate-Palmolive; Abrasive= Close-up, Chesebrough-Ponds) versus tap water alone (control) were used to abrade 2 cements (Fleck's Mizzy Zinc Phosphate [ZP]; 3M-ESPE Unicem universal cement [UC]) using cement-filled slots (160 m wide) cut into wear-resistant ceramic blocks.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: To assess the plaque removing efficacy and safety of a novel manual toothbrush (Oral-B Pulsar-PUL) compared to leading manual and battery toothbrushes.

Methodology: Three clinical studies were conducted, each having a randomized, examiner-blind, crossover design. Study 1 compared PUL to a newly marketed manual toothbrush, Colgate 360 degrees (COL), Study 2 compared PUL to the Oral-B Advantage Plus (AP) and Oral-B CrossAction (CA) manual toothbrushes, and Study 3 compared PUL to two battery toothbrushes, Oral-B CrossAction Power (CAP) and Crest SpinBrush Pro (SBP).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: The Rustogi et al. Modified Navy (RMNPI) and Turesky et al Modification of the Quigley Hein (TQHPI) plaque indices are commonly used to measure plaque removal. This study evaluated the possible correlations of both indices using data relative to a single use assessment of plaque removal using commercially available toothbrushes.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: To evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of a dual action power toothbrush (Crest SpinBrush Pro Clean) relative to an ADA reference manual toothbrush. In addition to overall plaque removal, emphasis was put on plaque reduction around the gingival margin, interproximal areas of the tooth and in the posterior segment of the dentition.

Methods: The study was a randomized, examiner-blind, two-treatment, four-period, crossover design.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!