The efficacy of an oscillating‐rotating power toothbrush compared to a high‐frequency sonic power toothbrush on parameters of dental plaque and gingival inflammation: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

AIM: To establish the efficacy of oscillating‐rotating power toothbrush (OR‐PTB) compared to high‐frequency sonic power toothbrush (HFS‐PTB) on improving parameters of plaque and gingival inflammation. Safety and participants' preference were secondary interests. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE‐PubMed and Cochrane‐CENTRAL databases were searched, up to April 2021. Inclusion criteria were (randomized)controlled clinical trials that evaluated healthy humans brushing with an OR‐PTB compared to a HFS‐PTB. Evaluation for a minimum of 4 weeks, of one or more of the following parameters: plaque index scores (PI), bleeding scores (BS), number of bleeding sites (NoB) and gingival index scores (GI). RESULTS: Thirty two publications involving 38 comparisons were included after the independent screening. The descriptive analysis showed that in 54% of the comparisons, a significant difference in favour of the OR‐PTB was found for PI, BS and GI scores. The Quigley and Hein index showed a significant difference of means (DiffM) between the end scores (DiffM 0.13, 95% CI [0.05;0.21] p < 0.001), as well as for the Rustogi‐modified Navy index (DiffM 0.01, 95% CI [0.01;0.03] p = 0.002). This is in line with the meta‐analysis for BS (DiffM 0.09, 95% CI [0.03;0.14] p = 0.003), for which the results were in favour of the OR‐PTB and considered potentially clinically relevant. NoB showed a significant difference in favour of the OR‐PTB for the end scores (DiffM 3.61, 95% CI [2.63;4.58] p < 0.00001). No difference in safety was indicated, 78% of participants preferred the OR‐PTB. CONCLUSION: For patients to maintain good plaque control and improve gingival health, there is a small but significant difference based on longer‐term studies between OR‐PTB and HFS‐PTB. This difference is potentially clinically relevant.