Implant failure · Patients with an atrophic maxillary sinus requiring augmentation (1 to 5 mm residual bone height)
Sinus lift with bone graft (granular Bio-Oss) showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with sinus lift without bone graft (Inion resorbable rigid barrier…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Cost (relative cost of powered vs manual) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus
Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Adverse events · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Trimpeneers 1997 (36 adolescents); no significant differences between counter oscillation and rotation oscillation for gingival index / bleeding index at 1 and 2 months (P values 0.06 to 0.75); data unsuitable for…
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported
Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Calculus · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Side to side action powered toothbrush showed no clear difference in gingivitis (level reduction) compared with rotation oscillation powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Adverse events · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Side to side action powered toothbrush led to higher plaque (level reduction) compared with rotation oscillation powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Side to side action powered toothbrush showed no clear difference in plaque (level reduction) compared with counter oscillation powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Multidimensional powered toothbrush showed no clear difference in gingivitis (level reduction) compared with rotation oscillation powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Ionic powered toothbrush vs Powered toothbrush with a different mode of action
Outcome not reported · People of any age with no reported disability affecting their ability to practise normal self-toothbrushing; individuals wearing…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Trimpeneers 1997 reported a significant difference in favour of the counter oscillation brush for plaque index at 2 months over a circular mode of action brush; data were unsuitable for meta-analysis.
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported
Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
One cross-over trial of 36 adolescents (Trimpeneers 1997); data not presented in a suitable format for meta-analysis; no significant differences between counter oscillation and rotation oscillation for plaque index /…
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported
Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Analysis 5.1 Plaque < 3 months (Turesky): 3 trials, 236 participants (Goyal 2005; Patters 2005; Zimmer 2005); significant heterogeneity (P < 0.1; I2 = 96%), so no statistical pooling was undertaken.
3 studies · 236 participants
GRADE not reported
Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Trimpeneers 1997 reported a significant difference in favour of the counter oscillation brush for gingival index at 2 months over a circular mode of action brush; data were unsuitable for meta-analysis.
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported