Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 2 Gingivitis scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 2 Gingivitis scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Counter oscillation, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Rotation oscillation, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Circular, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites.

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Ultrasonic, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months.

Comparison 6 Unknown or other action, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Unknown or other action, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 6 Unknown or other action, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 Unknown or other action, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 6 Unknown or other action, Outcome 3 Gingival scores > 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.3

Comparison 6 Unknown or other action, Outcome 3 Gingival scores > 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 3 Plaque scores at > 3 months at all sites.

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months at all sites.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.4

Comparison 7 Ionic brushes, Outcome 4 Gingival scores at > 3 months at all sites.

Table 1. Summary of characteristics of excluded studies

Reason for exclusion

Number (n = 245)

Less than 28 days

93

Not powered versus manual

65

Not RCT

27

Author contacted for more information, no reply after 3 months

15

Split mouth

15

Duplicate abstract or study

1

Potential high for compromised tooth brushing efficacy

8

Cross‐over trial, authors contacted for more information, no reply after 3 months

5

Outcomes not under consideration

9

Combined intervention

9

No movement of brush head

2

Laboratory study

11

Teeth brushed by another person

1

Not teeth

1

Not human

1

Abstract only

1

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Summary of characteristics of excluded studies
Table 2. Summary of inclusion criteria categories within included studies

Inclusion criteria

Number (n = 42)

Exclusion criteria related to medical history

29

Adults

34

Minimum number of teeth

24

Minimum periodontal baseline measures

18

Participants recruited from dental clinics

11

Concurrent fixed orthodontic treatment

5

Some participants aged less than 16 years

9

Volunteer university students

3

Dental students

1

Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. Summary of inclusion criteria categories within included studies
Table 3. Summary of exclusion criteria categories within included studies

Exclusion criteria

Number (n = 42)

Pregnancy or lactation

5

Previous use of powered toothbrushes

4

Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment

6

Previous periodontal treatment

2

Dental students

2

Cervical restorations

1

Smoking

1

Maximum periodontal measure

4

Figuras y tablas -
Table 3. Summary of exclusion criteria categories within included studies
Table 4. Summary of toothbrush modes of action, number of trials and participants

Mode of action

Trial ID

Number of trials

n ‐ attrition

Side to side

Glass 1965, Ho 1997, Johnson 1994, Lobene 1964, O'Beirne 1996, Tritten 1996, Walsh 1989, Yankell 1997

8

627

Counter oscillation

Baab 1989, Khocht 1992, Stabholz 1996, Wilson 1993, Yukna 1993

5

224

Rotation oscillation

Ainamo 1997, Barnes 1993, Clerehugh 1998, Cronin 1998, Dentino 2002, Heasman 1999, Lazarescu unpublished, Stoltze 1994, Warren 2001, Yankell 1997, van der Weijden 1994, Haffajee 2001a, Lapiere unpublished, Hickman 2002, Sharma 2000, Soparkar 2000, Sowinski 2000, Garcia‐Godoy 2001

18

1444

Circular

Khocht 1992, McAllan 1976, Yankell 1996

3

168

Ultrasonic

Forgas Brockman 1998, Terezhalmy 1995, Zimmer 2002

3

171

Unknown

Emling 1991, Soparkar 1964, Toto 1966, Singh unpublished

4

870

Ionic

Van Swol 1996, Pucher 1999, Galgut 1996

3

179

Figuras y tablas -
Table 4. Summary of toothbrush modes of action, number of trials and participants
Table 5. Sensitivity analyses of trials of rotation oscillation versus manual (1‐3 months)

Group selected

Index

Number of studies

SMD (95%CI)

Effect P‐value

Het. Chi2

Het. P‐value

I2 (%)

All studies

plaque

15

‐0.43 (‐0.72 to ‐0.14)

0.004

81.81

< 0.001

82.9

Full mouth recording

plaque

14

‐0.46 (‐0.77 to ‐0.16)

0.003

78.84

< 0.001

83.5

Adequate concealed allocation

plaque

6

‐0.06 (‐0.51 to 0.39)

0.81

27.72

< 0.001

82.0

Adequate random number generation

plaque

6

‐0.07 (‐0.51 to 0.37)

0.75

28.49

< 0.001

82.4

Outcome assessor blinded

plaque

13

‐0.38 (‐0.67 to ‐0.09)

0.010

63.98

< 0.001

81.2

Adequate reporting of attrition

plaque

13

‐0.45 (‐0.79 to ‐0.11)

0.010

80.17

< 0.001

85.0

Manufacturer funded

plaque

9

‐0.39 (‐0.80 to 0.02)

0.06

61.52

< 0.001

87.0

Trials not limited to patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances

plaque

14

‐0.46 (‐0.76 to ‐0.16)

0.003

78.61

< 0.001

83.5

All studies

gingivitis

16

‐0.62 (‐0.90 to ‐0.34)

< 0.001

83.96

< 0.001

82.1

Full mouth recording

gingivitis

14

‐0.70 (‐1.01 to ‐0.40)

< 0.001

75.99

< 0.001

82.9

Adequate concealed allocation

gingivitis

6

‐0.38 (‐0.66 to ‐0.11)

0.007

10.71

0.06

53.3

Adequate random number generation

gingivitis

7

‐0.40 (‐0.64 to ‐0.17)

< 0.001

11.32

0.08

47.0

Outcome assessor blinded

gingivitis

14

‐0.54 (‐0.79 to ‐0.30)

< 0.001

52.34

< 0.001

75.2

Adequate reporting of attrition

gingivitis

14

‐0.67 (‐0.99 to ‐0.34)

< 0.001

82.43

< 0.001

84.2

Manufacturer funded

gingivitis

10

‐0.69 (‐0.98 to ‐0.40)

< 0.001

37.99

< 0.001

76.3

Trials not limited to patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances

gingivitis

14

‐0.70 (‐1.01 to ‐0.39)

< 0.001

76.77

< 0.001

83.1

Figuras y tablas -
Table 5. Sensitivity analyses of trials of rotation oscillation versus manual (1‐3 months)
Comparison 1. Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites Show forest plot

6

402

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.42 [‐0.91, 0.07]

1.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

4

324

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.36, 0.08]

1.2 Silness and Löe

2

78

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.72 [‐4.93, 1.49]

2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

8

627

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.44 [‐0.91, 0.02]

2.1 Löe and Silness

4

174

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.60 [‐1.34, 0.14]

2.2 Lobene gingival index

3

410

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.39 [‐1.24, 0.46]

2.3 BOP

1

43

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.10 [‐0.70, 0.50]

3 Plaque scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

2

220

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.03 [‐0.23, 0.29]

3.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

1

166

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.04 [‐0.26, 0.34]

3.2 Silness and Löe

1

54

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.53, 0.53]

4 Gingival scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

2

220

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.12 [‐0.14, 0.39]

4.1 Löe and Silness

1

54

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.53, 0.53]

4.2 Lobene Gingival Index

1

166

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.16 [‐0.14, 0.47]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Side to side powered toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes
Comparison 2. Counter oscillation

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites Show forest plot

4

184

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.07 [‐0.36, 0.22]

1.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

4

184

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.07 [‐0.36, 0.22]

2 Gingivitis scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

4

172

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.04 [‐0.52, 0.45]

2.1 Gingival Index Löe

2

103

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.11 [‐1.22, 0.99]

2.2 Lobene gingival index

1

40

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.03 [‐0.65, 0.59]

2.3 BOP

1

29

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.06 [‐0.68, 0.79]

3 Plaque scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

2

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.63 [‐1.11, ‐0.14]

3.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

2

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.63 [‐1.11, ‐0.14]

4 Gingival scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

2

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.19 [‐0.66, 0.29]

4.1 Lobene gingival index

1

40

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.18 [‐0.80, 0.44]

4.2 BOP

1

29

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.19 [‐0.93, 0.54]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Counter oscillation
Comparison 3. Rotation oscillation

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites Show forest plot

15

1181

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.43 [‐0.72, ‐0.14]

1.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

10

834

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.35 [‐0.73, 0.03]

1.2 Silness and Löe

2

115

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.17 [‐2.74, 0.40]

1.3 Visible plaque index Ainamo Bay

1

111

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.26 [‐0.63, 0.12]

1.4 Ortho modification of Silness and Löe

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.51, 0.51]

1.5 Navy plaque index mod Rustogi

1

61

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.71 [‐1.22, ‐0.19]

2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

16

1256

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.62 [‐0.90, ‐0.34]

2.1 Löe and Silness mod Lobene

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.67 [‐1.16, ‐0.18]

2.2 Löe and Silness

9

663

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.74 [‐1.16, ‐0.32]

2.3 Loe and Silness mod Chilton

2

124

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.23 [‐1.90, ‐0.56]

2.4 Lobene gingival index

3

290

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.11 [‐0.46, 0.24]

2.5 BOP Ainamo Bay

1

110

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.21 [‐0.58, 0.17]

3 Plaque scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

3

266

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.29 [‐2.67, 0.08]

3.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

1

78

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐2.95 [‐3.60, ‐2.30]

3.2 Silness and Löe

1

77

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.73 [‐1.19, ‐0.26]

3.3 Visible plaque index Ainamo Bay

1

111

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.28 [‐0.66, 0.09]

4 Gingival scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

4

423

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.51 [‐0.76, ‐0.25]

4.1 Lobene gingival index

2

234

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.36 [‐0.63, ‐0.09]

4.2 BOP Ainamo Bay

2

189

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.66 [‐1.08, ‐0.24]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. Rotation oscillation
Comparison 4. Circular

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites Show forest plot

3

168

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.06 [‐0.36, 0.25]

1.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

2

128

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.02 [‐0.37, 0.33]

1.2 Silness and Löe

1

40

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.17 [‐0.80, 0.45]

2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

3

168

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.39 [‐0.95, 0.18]

2.1 GI Löe Silness

2

103

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.35 [‐1.34, 0.64]

2.2 Lobene

1

65

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.50 [‐0.99, ‐0.00]

3 Plaque scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

1

40

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.04 [‐0.58, 0.66]

3.1 Silness and Löe

1

40

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.04 [‐0.58, 0.66]

4 Gingival scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

1

40

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.30 [‐0.92, 0.33]

4.1 Löe and Silness

1

40

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.30 [‐0.92, 0.33]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 4. Circular
Comparison 5. Ultrasonic

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 month at all sites Show forest plot

3

171

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.13 [‐2.42, 0.15]

1.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

3

171

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.13 [‐2.42, 0.15]

2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

3

171

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.64 [‐1.04, ‐0.24]

2.1 Löe and Silness

2

108

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.55 [‐1.17, 0.07]

2.2 Papillary bleeding index

1

63

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.82 [‐1.34, ‐0.31]

3 Plaque scores at > 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

1

46

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.20 [‐0.38, 0.78]

3.1 Quigley Hein

1

46

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.20 [‐0.38, 0.78]

4 Gingival scores at > 3 months Show forest plot

1

46

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.58, 0.58]

4.1 Löe and Silness

1

46

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.58, 0.58]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 5. Ultrasonic
Comparison 6. Unknown or other action

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

1

57

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.32 [‐0.84, 0.20]

1.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

1

57

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.32 [‐0.84, 0.20]

2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

3

360

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.38 [‐0.59, ‐0.17]

2.1 Löe and Sillness

2

122

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.24 [‐0.60, 0.12]

2.2 Quigley and Hein

1

238

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.46 [‐0.73, ‐0.19]

3 Gingival scores > 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

1

510

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.16 [‐0.34, 0.02]

3.1 PMA

1

510

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.16 [‐0.34, 0.02]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 6. Unknown or other action
Comparison 7. Ionic brushes

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Plaque scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

3

179

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.28 [‐0.58, 0.01]

1.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

3

179

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.28 [‐0.58, 0.01]

2 Gingival scores at 1 to 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

2

116

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.51, 0.22]

2.1 Loe Silness

2

116

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.51, 0.22]

3 Plaque scores at > 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

1

64

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.01 [‐1.53, ‐0.49]

3.1 Quigley Hein (Turesky)

1

64

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.01 [‐1.53, ‐0.49]

4 Gingival scores at > 3 months at all sites Show forest plot

1

64

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.78 [‐1.29, ‐0.27]

4.1 Loe and Silness

1

64

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.78 [‐1.29, ‐0.27]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 7. Ionic brushes