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
Intervention not reported
Aggression OAS, OAS‐M, MOAS, self‐reported incidents, CPRS subscale (endpoints fall between 2 weeks and 6 months) · Any individual experiencing recurrent aggressive outbursts or episodes
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Impulsivity Q‐sort, Porteus Maze Test (endpoints fall between 2 weeks and 6 months) · Any individual experiencing recurrent aggressive outbursts or episodes
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Hostility BPRS hostility sub scale, CPRS hostility subscale, Q‐sort, speech content analysis (endpoints fall between 1 and 6 months) · Any individual experiencing recurrent aggressive outbursts or episodes
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Anger Self‐reported outbursts, Rosenweig Picture Frustration Test (endpoints fall between 2 weeks and 6 months) · Any individual experiencing recurrent aggressive outbursts or episodes
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Anger‐Hostility POMS anger‐hostility subscale (endpoints fall between 1 and 6 months) · Any individual experiencing recurrent aggressive outbursts or episodes
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Non‐compliance leaving the study early (endpoints fall between 1 and 6 months) · Any individual experiencing recurrent aggressive outbursts or episodes
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Adverse events, any (endpoints fall between 1 6 six months) · Any individual experiencing recurrent aggressive outbursts or episodes
1 finding from 1 review