Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Interplay between different manual toothbrushes and brushing loads on erosive tooth wear

Full text
Author(s):
Silva Souza, Cintia de Melo [1] ; Sakae, Leticia Oba [2] ; Acatauassu Carneiro, Paula Mendes [1] ; Esteves, Renata Antunes [1] ; Scaramucci, Tais [2]
Total Authors: 5
Affiliation:
[1] Univ Ctr State Para, Sch Dent, Dept Clin, Tv 9 Janeiro 927, BR-66060080 Belem, Para - Brazil
[2] Univ Sao Paulo, Sch Dent, Dept Restorat Dent, Av Prof Lineu Prestes 2227, Cidade Univ, BR-05508000 Sao Paulo, SP - Brazil
Total Affiliations: 2
Document type: Journal article
Source: Journal of Dentistry; v. 105, FEB 2021.
Web of Science Citations: 0
Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effect of different types of manual toothbrushes and brushing loads on the progression of erosive tooth wear (ETW) on enamel. Methods: Bovine enamel specimens (n = 10) were submitted to a 5-day erosive-abrasive cycling model (0.3 % citric acid for 5 min, artificial saliva for 60 min, 4x/day). Toothbrushing was carried out 2x/day for 15 s, according to the toothbrushes tested (ultra-soft (a): Curaprox 5460; ultra-soft (b): Sensodyne Repair \& Protect; soft (a): Colgate Slim Soft; soft (b): Oral-B Indicator Plus; medium: Johnson's Professional; hard: Tek) and brushing loads (1.5 N, 3 N). Surface loss (SL, in um) was assessed by optical profilometry on conclusion of the cycling. Some of the toothbrush characteristics were evaluated. Data were statistically analyzed (alpha = 0.05). Results: For the 1.5 N load, the hard brush showed the highest SL value, with statistical significance. The other toothbrushes did not differ significantly, except that ultra-soft (a) caused significantly higher SL than ultra-soft (b). For the 3 N load, hard and soft (a) exhibited the highest SL. Soft (b) and medium had the lowest SL value, with statistical significance. Only soft (a) and ultra-soft (b) showed significant difference between loads, with lower SL for the load of 1.5 N. None of the toothbrush characteristics were significantly correlated with SL. Conclusions: Although different degrees of enamel surface loss were observed with use of the different toothbrushes, no association was found between the toothbrush characteristics and SL. Depending on the toothbrush, the force of brushing was capable of modulating the ETW of enamel. Based on the brushing loads usually applied by healthy individuals, hard brushes are not recommended for use by patients with ETW. Clinical significance: The use of hard bristle brushes is not recommended for use by individuals who exert healthy forces when brushing their teeth. The toothbrush characteristics are of secondary importance in terms of causing enamel loss in ETW. (AU)

FAPESP's process: 17/14691-6 - Anti-erosive and anti-abrasive effect of a hybrid coating associated or not to sodium fluoride or sodium fluoride and stannous chloride on enamel and dentin
Grantee:Taís Scaramucci Forlin
Support Opportunities: Regular Research Grants