|
#16
18.01.2013, 10:26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Цитата:
|
|
#17
18.01.2013, 11:21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Цитата:
|
|
#18
18.01.2013, 11:22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Цитата:
|
|
#19
18.01.2013, 11:35
|
|||
|
|||
|
Цитата:
|
|
#20
18.01.2013, 11:38
|
||||
|
||||
|
Цитата:
давайте мухи отдельно, котлеты отдельно. Вопрос звучал об эффективности эл зубных щеток. Ответ: они эффективнее. Причем именно звуковые, а не ротационные. Eur J Orthod. 2010 Oct;32(5):481-9. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjp166. Epub 2010 Jun 15. In vitro tooth cleaning efficacy of electric toothbrushes around brackets. Schätzle M, Sener B, Schmidlin PR, Imfeld T, Attin T. SourceOrthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Zurich, Switzerland. [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ] Abstract This in vitro study assessed the cleaning efficacy of different electric toothbrushes around upper incisor brackets. Standard and Mini Diamond brackets were fixed on black-stained teeth. The teeth were coated with white titanium oxide and brushed in a machine twice for 1 minute each. Twelve different brush heads with either a wiping or an oscillating-rotating action were tested. After brushing, the teeth were scanned, the black surfaces were assessed planimetrically and a modified plaque index for orthodontic patients (PIOP) was introduced. Tooth areas, which were black again after brushing indicated tooth surface contact of the filaments and were expressed as a percentage of total area. The remaining white areas around the brackets indicated 'plaque-retentive' niches. Analysis of variance was used for individual comparison of the brush types. Bonferroni/Dunn adjustment was applied for multiple testing. The Sonicare toothbrush handle with the brush head 'Compact ProResults' (81.7 per cent) and the brush head 'Standard ProResults' (80.8 per cent), as well as the sonic Waterpik toothbrush SR 800E with the standard brush head (78.2 per cent), showed statistically significantly better cleaning efficacy than all others. The poorest cleaning efficacy was observed for the oscillating-rotating Braun Oral-B Professional Care with the brush head 'Ortho' (less than 50 per cent). The planimetric findings were in correspondence with the results of the PIOP assessment. Cleaning efficacy of electric toothbrushes around brackets on upper incisors was different between the tested brushes. The PIOP was practicable, effective, and easy to use, although it has to be verified in a clinical study. Dental care during orthodontic treatment with electric toothbrushes. [Article in English, German] Sander FM, Sander C, Toth M, Sander FG. SourceDepartment of Orthodontics, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany. Abstract OBJECTIVE: In an in-vitro experimental set-up, we tested the efficacy of different electric toothbrushes in cleaning teeth with a multibracket appliance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The efficacy of three sonic and four rotating toothbrushes were compared; the brushes removed artificial plaque from plastic teeth. The amount of removed plaque substitute was determined via a comparative photo-analysis with one picture of the teeth before and one picture after the brushing cycle. Two views of the tooth segment were chosen: one vestibular view and one apical view of the areas behind the bracket wings. All tests were carried out with water, elmex and Pearls and Dents as brushing media. RESULTS: The data showed greater brushing efficacy when Pearls and Dents toothpaste was used. The Sonicare toothbrush was the most efficient. The Sonicmax and rotating Oral-B ProfessionalCare 7000 were also very efficacious. On average, all the other toothbrushes performed less well. All toothbrushes were capable of brushing the undercut areas behind the bracket wings, with plaque removal being the greatest when the Sonicare toothbrush was used together with Pearls and Dents. CONCLUSIONS: The best electric toothbrushes did not demonstrate good tooth cleaning. Longer brushing times, mastery of the proper brushing technique, and/or special toothbrush heads are absolutely necessary. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2006 Feb;15(1):28-30. [The efficacy of dental plaque removed by using sonic electric toothbrush in children]. [Article in Chinese] Sun DF, Wang YJ, Hu WQ, Qu HX, Ni XK. SourceHuangpu District Dental Hospital, Shanghai 200002, China. [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ] Abstract PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of using sonic electric toothbrush to clean the teeth and control dental plaque in children. METHODS: 50 children aged 6 to 7 years old were selected and divided into 2 groups according to the use of sonic electric toothbrush and traditional manual toothbrush (control group). The numbers of dental plaque surface and PLI before and after tooth brushing were recorded. The data of the two groups were analyzed with SPSS10.0 software package for student's t test and chi(2) test. RESULTS: The ratio of dental plaque removal was 70.22% by using sonic electric toothbrush and 39.08% in the control group. The efficacy of dental plaque removal on the lingual and mesial buccal surface by using sonic electric toothbrush was 2 times greater than the control group. The PLI and the ratio of dental plaque removal were significantly different between the 2 groups (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sonic electric toothbrush can help children effectively remove dental plaque. It's an efficient instrument for oral care of children. Ваши доводы об осмотре стоматологом никак не связаны с выбором ЭЗЩ. Давайте соблюдать принципы EBM, а не флудить напрасно. Кстати, "патологическая стираемость" никаким образом не связана с типом эл щетки, а является следствием дисфункции краниомандибулярной системы.
|
|
#21
18.01.2013, 12:10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ну,я тоже подкину...:-)
Oral Health Prev Dent. 2012;10(3):219-24. Clinical Evaluation of the Plaque-removing Ability of Four Different Toothbrushes in Visually Impaired Children. Sharma A, Arora R, Kenchappa M, Bhayya DP, Singh D. Abstract Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of plaque removal of four different toothbrushes in visually disabled children. Three manual toothbrushes with different bristle designs (Oral-B CrossAction 40-regular, Oral-B ShinyClean 40-soft, Oral-B Advantage 40-soft) were compared with an electric toothbrush with an oscillating rotating head (Colgate Motion). Materials and Methods: Forty visually impaired children in a professional education center participated in the study and were divided into 4 groups of 10 participants each. To obtain a plaque-free condition at baseline, professional toothcleaning was performed on each participant. After instructions on how to use the toothbrushes, each group started the experiment using a differently designed toothbrush. After 1 week of application, the Quigley Hein plaque index (QHI) was used to assess the oral hygiene status of each participant. Student's t-test was chosen for comparing brushes. P < 0.01 was considered as the significance level. Results were presented as mean ± standard deviation. Results: The QHI values obtained with the electric Colgate Motion brush were the lowest (0.088 ± 0.051) and Advantage (0.801 ± 0.132) the highest. Although the QHI values with the manual Oral-B CrossAction (0.439 ± 0.094) were lower than those with the Oral-B shiny clean (0.503 ± 0.098), there was no statistical difference between the two. Conclusion: The electric toothbrushes are still the most effective in the visually disabled group. However, because of cheaper cost, easier availability and use, the Oral-B CrossAction toothbrush with criss-cross bristles could be a suitable alternative. Прошлогоднее,актуальное исследование,сравнение самой просто ЭЗЩ с мануальными щетками.
|
|
#22
18.01.2013, 17:28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Цитата:
|
|
|
|
#24
18.01.2013, 21:43
|
||||
|
||||
|
Выбор зубной щетки - личное дело каждого. Это не товар медицинского назначения, чтобы его рекомендовал или запрещал доктор на личной консультации, а предмет личной гигиены, который может быть подобран или откорректирован врачом при сопутствующих проблемах. Также как и зубные пасты. К тому же, большинство врачей не изучают данный предмет досконально, и их мнение основано больше на личных предпочтениях.
Например, мое личное предпочтение более 3 лет щетке Соникеа (уже вторая) изначально основано на личном опыте и вторично на исследованиях. Тот же триумф вообще не понравился и мирно спит на полке, хотя не скажу, что щетка плохая.
|
Линейный вид
