Cited by 22Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchDental Health and Care UtilizationPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments

Long‐term effect of the combined use of powered toothbrush and triclosan dentifrice in periodontal maintenance patients

Open access
Bogren, Anna, Teles, Ricardo P., Torresyap, Gay, Haffajee, Anne D., Socransky, Sigmund S., Jönsson, Kerstin, Wennström, Jan L.·2008·Journal of Clinical Periodontology

Abstract

Aim: To test the hypothesis of a superior clinical and microbiological effect of the combined use of powered toothbrush+triclosan‐containing dentifrice compared with manual toothbrush+regular fluoride‐containing dentifrice in periodontal maintenance patients. Material and Methods: A total of 128 periodontitis subjects involved in recall programmes were randomized to use either powered toothbrush with triclosan‐dentifrice (test) or manual toothbrush and standard dentifrice (control). Supportive periodontal treatment was provided at baseline and every 6 months. Plaque, bleeding on probing (BoP), probing pocket depth (PPD) and relative attachment level (RAL) were scored at baseline, 1, 2 and 3 years. Subgingival plaque samples were taken and analysed for their content of 40 bacterial species at each examination interval. All analyses were performed by “intention‐to‐treat” protocol. Results: Both groups showed significant reduction in BoP, PPD and in mean total counts of the 40 bacterial species between baseline and 3 years, while plaque score and RAL remained almost unchanged. No significant differences between the two prevention programmes were found for any of the clinical outcome variables or in mean counts of the various bacterial species. Conclusions: The study failed to demonstrate superior clinical and microbiological effects of powered toothbrush+triclosan dentifrice compared with manual toothbrush+standard fluoride‐dentifrice in periodontitis‐susceptible patients on regular maintenance therapy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2007.01180.x

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A randomized controlled clinical study lasting more than 3 years failed to demonstrate superior clinical and microbiologic effects of powered toothbrush and triclosan dentifrice compared with manual toothbrush and standard fluoride dentifrice in periodontitis-susceptible patients on regular maintenance therapy.

    “A randomized controlled clinical study lasting more than 3 years failed to demonstrate superior clinical and microbiologic effects of powered toothbrush and triclosan dentifrice compared with manual toothbrush and standard fluoride-dentifrice in periodontitis-susceptible patients on regular maintenance therapy.113”

    From Contemporary practices for mechanical oral hygiene to prevent periodontal disease. (2020) · cites this paper as [113]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bogren, A., Teles, R. P., Torresyap, G., Haffajee, A. D., Socransky, S. S., Jönsson, K., & Wennström, J. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
  • The Forsyth Institute (US)
  • Skaraborg Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Bogren, Anna
Venue
Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-01-10
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
157-164
ISSN
  • 0303-6979 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-051X
OpenAlex
W1604169793
Cited by
22
References
28
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal Of Clinical Periodontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (P01DE012861, DE 012861)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Dental Health and Care Utilization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Keywords
powered toothbrushes, manual toothbrush, fluoride toothpaste, periodontitis, periodontal maintenance, plaque control, bleeding on probing, probing depth, relative attachment level, subgingival bacteria, oral hygiene
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anti-Infective Agents, Local, Cariostatic Agents, Dental Plaque, Dentifrices, Electricity, Epidemiologic Methods, Female, Fluorides, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oral Hygiene, Periodontal Pocket, Periodontitis, Rotation, Toothbrushing, Triclosan, Tooth Loss

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review