Suppr超能文献

振荡旋转电动牙刷与高频超声电动牙刷对牙菌斑和牙龈炎症参数的疗效比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

The efficacy of an oscillating-rotating power toothbrush compared to a high-frequency sonic power toothbrush on parameters of dental plaque and gingival inflammation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Periodontology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), a joint venture between the Faculty of Dentistry of the University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Dent Hyg. 2023 Feb;21(1):77-94. doi: 10.1111/idh.12597. Epub 2022 Jun 25.

Abstract

AIM

To establish the efficacy of oscillating-rotating power toothbrush (OR-PTB) compared to high-frequency sonic power toothbrush (HFS-PTB) on improving parameters of plaque and gingival inflammation. Safety and participants' preference were secondary interests.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE-PubMed and Cochrane-CENTRAL databases were searched, up to April 2021. Inclusion criteria were (randomized)controlled clinical trials that evaluated healthy humans brushing with an OR-PTB compared to a HFS-PTB. Evaluation for a minimum of 4 weeks, of one or more of the following parameters: plaque index scores (PI), bleeding scores (BS), number of bleeding sites (NoB) and gingival index scores (GI).

RESULTS

Thirty two publications involving 38 comparisons were included after the independent screening. The descriptive analysis showed that in 54% of the comparisons, a significant difference in favour of the OR-PTB was found for PI, BS and GI scores. The Quigley and Hein index showed a significant difference of means (DiffM) between the end scores (DiffM 0.13, 95% CI [0.05;0.21] p < 0.001), as well as for the Rustogi-modified Navy index (DiffM 0.01, 95% CI [0.01;0.03] p = 0.002). This is in line with the meta-analysis for BS (DiffM 0.09, 95% CI [0.03;0.14] p = 0.003), for which the results were in favour of the OR-PTB and considered potentially clinically relevant. NoB showed a significant difference in favour of the OR-PTB for the end scores (DiffM 3.61, 95% CI [2.63;4.58] p < 0.00001). No difference in safety was indicated, 78% of participants preferred the OR-PTB.

CONCLUSION

For patients to maintain good plaque control and improve gingival health, there is a small but significant difference based on longer-term studies between OR-PTB and HFS-PTB. This difference is potentially clinically relevant.

摘要

目的

评估旋转震荡电动牙刷(OR-PTB)与高频超声电动牙刷(HFS-PTB)在改善菌斑和牙龈炎症参数方面的疗效。安全性和参与者的偏好是次要关注点。

材料和方法

检索了 MEDLINE-PubMed 和 Cochrane-CENTRAL 数据库,截至 2021 年 4 月。纳入标准为评估 OR-PTB 与 HFS-PTB 刷牙对健康人群的随机对照临床试验,评估时间至少为 4 周,评估参数至少有以下一种:菌斑指数(PI)评分、出血评分(BS)、出血部位数(NoB)和牙龈指数(GI)评分。

结果

经过独立筛选,共纳入 32 篇文献涉及 38 项比较。描述性分析显示,在 54%的比较中,OR-PTB 在 PI、BS 和 GI 评分方面有显著的优势。Quigley 和 Hein 指数显示终点评分(DiffM 0.13,95%CI [0.05;0.21] p < 0.001)和 Rustogi 改良海军指数(DiffM 0.01,95%CI [0.01;0.03] p = 0.002)的均值差异有统计学意义。这与 BS 的荟萃分析结果一致(DiffM 0.09,95%CI [0.03;0.14] p = 0.003),OR-PTB 更有优势,且被认为具有潜在的临床意义。NoB 显示 OR-PTB 组终点评分有显著差异(DiffM 3.61,95%CI [2.63;4.58] p < 0.00001)。没有安全性差异的迹象,78%的参与者更喜欢 OR-PTB。

结论

从长期研究来看,OR-PTB 与 HFS-PTB 相比,在维持良好的菌斑控制和改善牙龈健康方面有微小但有统计学意义的差异。这种差异具有潜在的临床意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a1e8/10084121/3e4e1a824842/IDH-21-77-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验