Comparison of Effectiveness of Manual Orthodontic, Powered and Sonic Toothbrushes on Oral Hygiene of Fixed Orthodontic Patients

INTRODUCTION Maintenance of good oral hygiene is important for patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment. AIM The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a manual orthodontic toothbrush, powered toothbrush with oscillating head and sonic toothbrush in controlling plaque, gingivitis and interdental bleeding in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment, and to compare their relative efficacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty subjects, who were to receive orthodontic treatment with both upper and lower fixed appliances, were randomly divided into three study groups, with 20 patients in each group. Groups I to III were given manual orthodontic, powered and sonic toothbrushes, respectively. Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI) and interdental bleeding index were scored to assess the level of plaque accumulation, gingival health and interdental bleeding at baseline; 4 and 8 weeks recall visits after fixed appliance bonding. Paired t-tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used for intragroup and intergroup comparisons. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS This study showed that a significant reduction in all the three indices scores was found from baseline to 4 and 8 weeks in group III. On intergroup comparison, no statistically significant differences were detected between the three groups for any of the parameters assessed. CONCLUSION On intragroup comparison, sonic brushes performed superiorly in reducing gingivitis, plaque and interdental bleeding as compared to the manual orthodontic and powered brushes. On intergroup comparison, the relative comparative effectiveness was found to be similar for all the three brushes. How to cite this article: Sharma R, Trehan M, Sharma S, Jharwal V, Rathore N. Comparison of Effectiveness of Manual Orthodontic, Powered and Sonic Toothbrushes on Oral Hygiene of Fixed Orthodontic Patients. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015;8(3):181-189.