Plaque · Medically healthy individuals (adults and children, 6-60 years)
Salvadora persica rinse reduced plaque more than placebo (favours Salvadora persica); certainty not GRADE-rated (Shekelle grade Ia).
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque · Medically healthy individuals (adults and children, 6-60 years)
0.12% chlorhexidine rinse reduced plaque relative to baseline; not GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque · Medically healthy individuals (adults and children, 6-60 years)
Salvadora persica rinse reduced plaque relative to its own baseline; not GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Streptococcus mutans count · Medically healthy individuals (adults and children, 6-60 years)
Placebo rinse did not significantly change Streptococcus mutans counts relative to baseline; not GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque · Medically healthy individuals (adults and children, 6-60 years)
0.2% chlorhexidine rinse reduced plaque relative to baseline; not GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Plaque · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, side-to-side action showed no clear difference in plaque score (>3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Plaque · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, ionic action led to lower plaque score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Gingivitis · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, ionic action showed no clear difference in gingivitis score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Dependability/reliability (mechanical failure) · 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
Plaque · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, rotation oscillation action led to lower plaque score (>3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Plaque · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, counter oscillation action led to lower plaque score (>3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Plaque · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, circular action showed no clear difference in plaque score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Staining · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
Gingivitis · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, side-to-side action showed no clear difference in gingivitis score (>3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Gingivitis · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, ultrasonic action led to lower gingivitis score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Powered versus manual toothbrushing for oral health 2014 · Cochrane All outcomesShort term (1 to 3 months)
SMD -0.99 [-1.21, -0.76]
5 studies · 354 participants
GRADE not reported
Ultrasonic vs manual, gingivitis at >3 months: one trial (Terezhalmy 1995a); no statistically significant difference; totals not selected (no pooled estimate presented in this version).
1 study · 46 participants
GRADE not reported
Gingivitis · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
2 findings from 1 review
Unknown/other action vs manual, gingivitis at >3 months: 1 trial; totals not selected.
1 study
GRADE not reported
Powered versus manual toothbrushing for oral health 2014 · Cochrane All outcomesShort term (1 to 3 months)
Unknown/other action vs manual, gingivitis at 1 to 3 months: 3 trials; totals not selected (data presented in forest plots but not pooled).
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Gingivitis · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush, counter oscillation action showed no clear difference in gingivitis score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Gingivitis · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
Powered toothbrush (any mode of action) probably leads to lower gingivitis score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush (moderate certainty).
2 findings from 1 review
Adverse events (soft tissue trauma) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review