Efficacy of Electric Tooth Brushing Compared to Manual Toothbrushing in Patients With Special Health Care Needs: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Ahsan Kaleem Khan, Shahrukh Ali Khan, Syed Murtaza Raza Kazmi, Taimur Khalid
{"title":"Efficacy of Electric Tooth Brushing Compared to Manual Toothbrushing in Patients With Special Health Care Needs: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Ahsan Kaleem Khan, Shahrukh Ali Khan, Syed Murtaza Raza Kazmi, Taimur Khalid","doi":"10.1111/idh.70142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of electric toothbrushing compared to manual toothbrushing in improving oral hygiene among people with special health care needs, including individuals requiring caregiver assistance as well as those capable of independent brushing with or without supervision, using an evidence-based approach.</p><p><strong>Data/sources: </strong>In April 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across Medline (PubMed), the Cochrane Library and Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source (DOSS), targeting studies from January 1985 to January 2023. Data was collected using a custom form focusing on study characteristics, population attributes and key outcomes. The methodological quality was evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool-2 (RoB-2) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a descriptive analysis was performed according to SWiM guidelines.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Titles and abstracts were screened to exclude duplicates and irrelevant studies, followed by a full-text review of potentially eligible articles. Two independent reviewers assessed each study against predefined criteria. Studies were selected based on their design (RCTs), population (people with special health care needs, including those requiring caregiver assistance or supervision) and outcomes (oral hygiene measures such as plaque index, gingival index, biofilm reduction, microbial salivary count, pocket depth, bleeding on probing, patient and caregiver-reported outcomes). From 3862 studies identified, 14 were included in the final review.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both electric and manual toothbrushes can maintain or improve oral hygiene for patients with special health care needs. Although some studies show electric brushes often lead to better plaque reduction and gingival health, others report comparable outcomes when manual brushing is well supervised. Future research should assess the impact of caregiver training, cost and evolving brush technologies to optimise long-term oral care for individuals with physical or cognitive impairments.</p>","PeriodicalId":13791,"journal":{"name":"International journal of dental hygiene","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of dental hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/idh.70142","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The primary objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of electric toothbrushing compared to manual toothbrushing in improving oral hygiene among people with special health care needs, including individuals requiring caregiver assistance as well as those capable of independent brushing with or without supervision, using an evidence-based approach.

Data/sources: In April 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across Medline (PubMed), the Cochrane Library and Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source (DOSS), targeting studies from January 1985 to January 2023. Data was collected using a custom form focusing on study characteristics, population attributes and key outcomes. The methodological quality was evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool-2 (RoB-2) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a descriptive analysis was performed according to SWiM guidelines.

Study selection: Titles and abstracts were screened to exclude duplicates and irrelevant studies, followed by a full-text review of potentially eligible articles. Two independent reviewers assessed each study against predefined criteria. Studies were selected based on their design (RCTs), population (people with special health care needs, including those requiring caregiver assistance or supervision) and outcomes (oral hygiene measures such as plaque index, gingival index, biofilm reduction, microbial salivary count, pocket depth, bleeding on probing, patient and caregiver-reported outcomes). From 3862 studies identified, 14 were included in the final review.

Conclusion: Both electric and manual toothbrushes can maintain or improve oral hygiene for patients with special health care needs. Although some studies show electric brushes often lead to better plaque reduction and gingival health, others report comparable outcomes when manual brushing is well supervised. Future research should assess the impact of caregiver training, cost and evolving brush technologies to optimise long-term oral care for individuals with physical or cognitive impairments.

特殊医疗需求患者电动刷牙与手动刷牙的疗效比较:一项系统综述。
目的:本系统综述的主要目的是采用循证方法,评估电动牙刷与手动牙刷在改善特殊卫生保健需求人群的口腔卫生方面的效果,包括需要护理人员帮助的个人,以及能够在有或没有监督的情况下独立刷牙的人。数据/来源:2023年4月,对Medline (PubMed)、Cochrane图书馆和牙科与口腔科学资源(DOSS)进行了全面检索,目标是1985年1月至2023年1月的研究。数据收集使用自定义表格,侧重于研究特征、人群属性和关键结果。采用随机对照试验(rct)的风险偏倚工具-2 (rob2)对方法学质量进行评估,并根据SWiM指南进行描述性分析。研究选择:对标题和摘要进行筛选,排除重复和不相关的研究,然后对可能符合条件的文章进行全文审查。两名独立评审员根据预先确定的标准评估每项研究。研究的选择基于其设计(随机对照试验)、人群(有特殊卫生保健需求的人群,包括需要护理人员帮助或监督的人群)和结果(口腔卫生措施,如菌斑指数、牙龈指数、生物膜减少、微生物唾液计数、牙袋深度、探针出血、患者和护理人员报告的结果)。从确定的3862项研究中,有14项纳入了最终综述。结论:电动牙刷和手动牙刷都能保持或改善特殊保健患者的口腔卫生。尽管一些研究表明,电动牙刷通常能更好地减少牙菌斑,促进牙龈健康,但也有研究报告称,在良好的监督下,手动刷牙的结果与此相当。未来的研究应评估护理人员培训、成本和不断发展的刷牙技术的影响,以优化身体或认知障碍患者的长期口腔护理。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
International journal of dental hygiene
International journal of dental hygiene DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Dental Hygiene is the official scientific peer-reviewed journal of the International Federation of Dental Hygienists (IFDH). The journal brings the latest scientific news, high quality commissioned reviews as well as clinical, professional and educational developmental and legislative news to the profession world-wide. Thus, it acts as a forum for exchange of relevant information and enhancement of the profession with the purpose of promoting oral health for patients and communities. The aim of the International Journal of Dental Hygiene is to provide a forum for exchange of scientific knowledge in the field of oral health and dental hygiene. A further aim is to support and facilitate the application of new knowledge into clinical practice. The journal welcomes original research, reviews and case reports as well as clinical, professional, educational and legislative news to the profession world-wide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书