Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM42276584

Powered vs. manual toothbrushes in fixed orthodontic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Liu Yinli, Van der Weijden Fawn Nitanee, Jaquet Nadine, et al. · European journal of orthodontics · 2026 · PubMed · doi:10.1093/ejo/cjag026

Findings

Population Orthodontic patients with buccal fixed appliances

47 findings

Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only low-risk-of-bias RCTs
SMD -0.60 [-1.66, 0.45]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only RCTs
SMD -0.44 [-0.83, -0.06]
GRADE not reported
8 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only low-risk-of-bias studies
SMD -0.55 [-1.38, 0.27]
GRADE not reported
4 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only low-risk-of-bias RCTs
SMD -0.83 [-2.48, 0.83]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, PI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: PI
MD -0.61 [-1.35, 0.12]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, VPI (0-1)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: VPI (1 study, 2 comparisons)
MD 0.06 [0.00, 0.13]
GRADE not reported
1 study
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only studies without industry involvement
SMD -0.85 [-1.95, 0.26]
GRADE not reported
5 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · All indices combined (BOP, MPBI, EIBI, BI, MGI-S; 10 comparisons)
SMD -0.51 [-0.88, -0.13]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
9 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, QHPI/TMQH (0-5)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: QHPI, TMQH
MD -0.54 [-1.14, 0.06]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · All indices combined (QHPI, TMQH, OMPI, O'Leary PI, PI, JOPI; 14 comparisons)
SMD -0.77 [-1.33, -0.21]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
13 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · All indices combined (GI, RGI; 10 comparisons)
SMD -0.82 [-1.55, -0.09]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
10 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score, EIBI (0-1)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: EIBI
MD -0.06 [-0.14, 0.02]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only low-risk-of-bias studies
SMD -0.67 [-1.96, 0.61]
GRADE not reported
4 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only RCTs
SMD -1.02 [-1.90, -0.14]
GRADE not reported
8 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only RCTs
SMD -0.73 [-1.39, -0.06]
GRADE not reported
10 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score, BOP (0-1)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: BOP
MD -0.18 [-0.46, 0.11]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only RCTs without industry involvement
SMD -1.02 [-2.29, 0.25]
GRADE not reported
4 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only studies without industry involvement
SMD -0.55 [-1.03, -0.07]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only RCTs without industry involvement
SMD -0.55 [-1.03, -0.07]
GRADE not reported
4 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score, GI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: GI
MD -0.22 [-0.43, -0.02]
GRADE not reported
9 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score, BI (0-1)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: BI (1 study, 2 comparisons)
MD 0.01 [-0.04, 0.05]
GRADE not reported
1 study
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, O'Leary PI (0-1)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: O'Leary PI
MD -0.17 [-0.48, 0.15]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only low-risk-of-bias RCTs
SMD -0.43 [-0.85, -0.02]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score, MPBI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: MPBI
MD -0.54 [-0.71, -0.36]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only RCTs without industry involvement
SMD -0.62 [-1.61, 0.38]
GRADE not reported
4 studies
Powered toothbrush (any action mode)Manual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding scores (BS)
After the longest follow-up · Orthodontic clinics (fixed appliances) · Sensitivity analysis: Only low-risk-of-bias studies
SMD -0.43 [-0.85, -0.02]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, OMPI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index only: OMPI
MD -0.03 [-0.11, 0.04]
GRADE not reported
4 studies
Powered toothbrush (PTB), any action modeManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Sensitivity analysis: Only studies without industry involvement
SMD -0.89 [-1.80, 0.03]
GRADE not reported
5 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating-pulsating or oscillating-rotating (ORP/OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -0.46 [-1.20, 0.28]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
6 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating-pulsating or oscillating-rotating (ORP/OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS), GI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
MD 0.00 [-0.03, 0.04]
Moderate
Downgraded: risk of bias
4 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating-pulsating or oscillating-rotating (ORP/OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -0.15 [-0.36, 0.07]
Moderate
Downgraded: risk of bias
5 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating-pulsating or oscillating-rotating (ORP/OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, OMPI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index and action mode
MD 0.00 [-0.04, 0.04]
GRADE not reported
3 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating-pulsating (ORP) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -1.13 [-2.74, 0.49]
Very low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency
3 studies
Powered toothbrush, oscillating-rotating-pulsating (ORP) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque scores (PS)
After the longest follow-up · Orthodontic clinics (fixed appliances) · Same action mode and index: ORP PTB, QHPI/TMQH (0-5) (2 studies)
MD -0.54 [-1.14, 0.06]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating-pulsating (ORP) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS), GI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
MD 0.01 [-0.03, 0.05]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
2 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating-pulsating (ORP) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -0.11 [-0.46, 0.25]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
2 studies
Powered toothbrush, oscillating-rotating (OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding scores (BS)
After the longest follow-up · Orthodontic clinics (fixed appliances) · Same action mode and index: OR PTB, EIBI (0-1) (2 studies)
MD -0.06 [-0.14, 0.02]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating (OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -0.17 [-0.43, 0.10]
Moderate
Downgraded: risk of bias
3 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating (OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD 0.15 [-0.21, 0.51]
Moderate
Downgraded: risk of bias
3 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating (OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, OMPI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index and action mode
MD 0.00 [-0.11, 0.11]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
PTB with oscillating-rotating (OR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS), GI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
MD 0.00 [-0.05, 0.06]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
2 studies
PTB with counter-rotational (CR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -1.45 [-2.85, -0.05]
Very low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency
2 studies
PTB with counter-rotational (CR) actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -0.70 [-1.80, 0.39]
Very low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency
2 studies
PTB with sonic actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score, PI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · Same index and action mode
MD -0.51 [-1.96, 0.94]
GRADE not reported
2 studies
PTB with sonic actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingival bleeding score (BS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -1.65 [-3.53, 0.22]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
3 studies
PTB with sonic actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Gingivitis score (GS), GI (0-3)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
MD -0.30 [-0.75, 0.15]
Very low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency
2 studies
PTB with sonic actionManual toothbrush (MTB)Plaque score (PS)
Longest follow-up · Orthodontic patients with fixed appliances · By PTB action mode
SMD -1.20 [-2.67, 0.28]
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
4 studies

Included primary studies 44

Open in Studies
StudyYearAlso included byOutcomes it informs hereTrial data
Costa 2007
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Costa 2007
Efficacy of ultrasonic, electric and manual toothbrushes in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances.
PMID:17319775
20071 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Kumar 2023
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Bilen 2021
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Bilen 2021
The short-term effects of manual and interactive powered toothbrushes on the periodontal status of orthodontic patients: A randomized…
PMID:33384265
2021this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Clerehugh 1998
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Clerehugh 1998
A practice-based randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of an electric and a manual toothbrush on gingival health in patients with…
PMID:9793284
1998this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Erbe 2019
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Erbe 2019
Comparative assessment of plaque removal and motivation between a manual toothbrush and an interactive power toothbrush in adolescents…
PMID:30935601
2019this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Erden 2024
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Erden 2024
Manual vs. interactive power toothbrush on plaque removal and salivary Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus casei levels :…
PMID:37266910
2024this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Farhadian 2015
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Farhadian 2015
Comparison of Electric Toothbrush, Persica and Chlorhexidine Mouthwashes on Reduction of Gingival Enlargement in Orthodontic Patients: A…
PMID:25610916
2015this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Heasman 1998
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Heasman 1998
Comparative study of electric and manual toothbrushes in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances.
PMID:9674679
1998this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Hickman 2002
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Hickman 2002
Powered vs manual tooth brushing in fixed appliance patients: a short term randomized clinical trial.
PMID:11999936
2002this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Ho 1997
The Mortality from Phthisis: A Statistical Investigation having bearing upon the Question of Personal Communicability.
PMID:19978159
1914this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Ho 1997
Effectiveness of the Sonicare sonic toothbrush on reduction of plaque, gingivitis, probing pocket depth and subgingival bacteria in…
PMID:9487840
1997this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Jackson 1991
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Jackson 1991
Comparison between electric toothbrushing and manual toothbrushing, with and without oral irrigation, for oral hygiene of orthodontic…
PMID:1986517
1991this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Kossack 2005
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Kossack 2005
Plaque and gingivitis reduction in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances-comparison of toothbrushes and…
PMID:15711898
2005this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Kumar 2023
The Efficacy of the Three Types of Plaque Control Methods During Fixed Orthodontic Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
PMID:37261166
2023this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Manphibool 2023
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Manphibool 2023
Effects of blue-light LED toothbrush on reducing dental plaque and gingival inflammation in orthodontic patients with fixed appliances: a…
PMID:37189136
2023this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Mylonopoulou 2021
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Mylonopoulou 2021
A randomized, 3-month, parallel-group clinical trial to compare the efficacy of electric 3-dimensional toothbrushes vs manual toothbrushes…
PMID:34752255
2021this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Naqvi 2020
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Sadiq 2009
A comparison between two methods of brushing on clinical periodontal parameters in patients with fixed orthodontic appliance
DOI:10.32828/mdj.v6i1.421
2018this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Sadiq 2009
Methylation and acetylation of 15-hydroxyanandamide modulate its interaction with the endocannabinoid system.
PMID:20096328
2010this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Silvestrini 2010
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Silvestrini Biavati 2010
Manual orthodontic vs. oscillating-rotating electric toothbrush in orthodontic patients: a randomised clinical trial.
PMID:21250772
2010this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Thienpont 2001
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Thienpont 2001
Comparative study of 2 electric and 2 manual toothbrushes in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances.
PMID:11606959
2001this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Trimpeneers 1997
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Trimpeneers 1997
Effect of electric toothbrushes versus manual toothbrushes on removal of plaque and periodontal status during orthodontic treatment.
PMID:9155807
1997this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Trombeli 1995
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Trombeli 1995
Clinical evaluation of plaque removal by counterrotational electric toothbrush in orthodontic patients.
PMID:7568736
1995this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
van Venrooy 1985
Plaque removal with a new powered instrument for orthodontic patients in fixed appliances.
PMID:3867414
1985this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
White 1996
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
White 1996
Efficacy of a sonic toothbrush in reducing plaque and gingivitis in adolescent patients.
PMID:9063177
1996this review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Wilcoxon 1991
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Wilcoxon 1991
The effectiveness of a counterrotational-action power toothbrush on plaque control in orthodontic patients.
PMID:1986529
1991this review onlynot statednot extracted yet

Overlap with other reviews

Reviews that include the same primary studies are not independent evidence. Shared counts match studies by PMID, DOI or NCT, and otherwise by author and year (a probable match). Only the non-Cochrane dental reviews have study lists, so overlap with Cochrane reviews is not counted yet.

Review question

ElementPlanned (methods)Found (results)
PopulationOrthodontic patients with buccal fixed appliances, in good general health, brushing performed by participantsOrthodontic patients with fixed appliances; 23 papers (39 comparisons); sample sizes 20 to 144; ages 10 to 53 years
InterventionPowered toothbrushes (rechargeable, motor-driven bristle motion, single functional brush head)PTBs: oscillating-rotating-pulsating (6 papers), oscillating-rotating (5), counter-rotational (5), rotary (1), sonic (6); action mode unspecified in 5
ComparisonManual toothbrushesManual toothbrushes (orthodontic MTBs in 10 papers; details not given in 3)
OutcomesPlaque scores, gingivitis scores, gingival bleeding scoresPlaque scores (39 comparisons; 9 indices), gingivitis scores (21 comparisons; 4 indices), gingival bleeding scores (24 comparisons; 7 indices); meta-analysis of 14, 10 and 10 comparisons
Study designsRandomized or non-randomized controlled clinical trials (parallel or crossover); split-mouth and single-brushing studies excluded19 RCTs and 4 CCTs; 13 parallel and 10 crossover designs
TimingNo minimum intervention duration; longest follow-up analyzedIntervention duration 1 week to 4 months

AMSTAR 2 items

Two independent extractors rated each item. Their ratings are shown side by side because they have not been reconciled yet. The overall rating follows Shea et al. 2017: one critical flaw gives Low, more than one gives Critically Low.

ItemExtractor AExtractor BAgree
1Research question includes PICO componentsYesYesyes
2Protocol established before the reviewcriticalPartial YesPartial Yesyes
3Choice of study designs explainedYesYesyes
4Comprehensive literature searchcriticalPartial YesPartial Yesyes
5Study selection in duplicateYesYesyes
6Data extraction in duplicateYesYesyes
7List of excluded studies with reasonscriticalYesYesyes
8Included studies described in detailYesYesyes
9Risk of bias assessed satisfactorilycriticalRCT: Yes · NRSI: YesNRSI: Yes · RCT: Yesno
10Funding of included studies reportedYesYesyes
11Appropriate meta-analysis methodscriticalRCT: Yes · NRSI: YesNRSI: No · RCT: Yesno
12Impact of risk of bias on the pooled resultsYesYesyes
13Risk of bias accounted for in interpretationcriticalYesYesyes
14Heterogeneity explainedYesYesyes
15Publication bias investigatedcriticalYesYesyes
16Conflicts of interest reportedYesYesyes
OverallHighLowno