title: A 3-month clinical comparison of the safety and efficacy of two battery-operated toothbrushes: the Braun Oral-B Battery toothbrush and the Colgate Actibrush.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the safety and efficacy of two battery-operated, non-rechargeable power toothbrushes, the Braun Oral-B Battery toothbrush (D4) and the Colgate Actibrush.
  
  
  METHODS
  This was a randomized, single-blind, parallel-group study carried out over a 3-month period. A total of 114 subjects from a general population, who met the inclusion criteria of the study and who had whole mouth plaque scores of > or = 1.5 and gingivitis scores of > or = 1.2, participated in the study. Subjects were given either the D4 or the Colgate Actibrush with the manufacturers' instructions, and were asked to brush their teeth at home twice each day. At baseline and after 1 and 3 months, subjects were examined for oral hard and soft tissue health, after which they were assessed for gingivitis (Modified Gingival Index), bleeding (Gingival Bleeding Index), and plaque (Modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index). Prior to each assessment, subjects refrained from all oral hygiene procedures for a period of 12-18 hours.
  
  
  RESULTS
  No evidence was found of significant oral soft or hard tissue trauma, and both brushes were considered to be safe when used according to the manufacturers' instructions. In the D4 group, whole mouth, marginal and approximal plaque scores were significantly reduced from baseline (P < 0.05) after both 1 and 3 months by 7-12%, whereas, in the Actibrush group, plaque scores remained relatively unchanged from baseline throughout the study. Furthermore, comparisons between the toothbrush groups showed that whole mouth, marginal and approximal plaque scores for the D4 were significantly lower than those for the Actibrush at both the 1- and 3-month assessments. Modified Gingival Index scores after 3 months were significantly reduced from baseline in both groups by 7-8%. Similarly, percentages of bleeding sites were significantly lower by 12-15%. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to gingivitis scores.
authors: University Park Research Center, Fort Wayne, Indiana 46825, USA. putt@ipfw.edu
authors: M S
authors: MS
authors: Putt
authors: J L
authors: JL
authors: Milleman
authors: K R
authors: KR
authors: Davidson
authors: M
authors: M
authors: Cugini
authors: P R
authors: PR
authors: Warren
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D003773:Dental Plaque / Q000473:pathology / Q000517:prevention & control; D003774:Dental Plaque Index; D011211:Electric Power Supplies; D004867:Equipment Design; D004869:Equipment Safety; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005884:Gingival Hemorrhage / Q000473:pathology / Q000517:prevention & control; D005891:Gingivitis / Q000473:pathology / Q000517:prevention & control; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009061:Mouth Mucosa / Q000473:pathology; D010512:Periodontal Index; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D014099:Toothbrushing / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D016896:Treatment Outcome