IADR Abstract Archives
Clinical Validation of Organic Plaque Simulation in Robot Toothbrushing Tests
Objectives: Robot testing of simulated plaque control is important for developing toothbrushes. Therefore, the aim was (i) to test a novel formulation of organic plaque simulating viscosity and adhesion of natural plaque and (ii) to estimate a valid accuracy of robot outcome in relation to clinical results.
Methods: Clinical programme: After ethical approval (EK-UWH 552007), professional tooth cleaning and 3-day-plaque-regrowth, 22 calibrated subjects used in RCT video-supported horizontal, rotating and vertical brushing movements for 20s buccally/20s lingually at 9 teeth 32 – 47 with force 3.5N. Toothbrushes Dr. Best medium (TB1) and Interdent medium (TB2) (GlaxoSmithKline, Munich, Germany) were tested. Stained plaque was photographed and blind-coded at 18 planimetrical fields and 10 risk fields using modified Navy-Plaque-Index (Lang et al. 2011) with PPI-Codes 0-1(<50 %)-2(>50 %) per field.
Robot programme: Same brushes and techniques were tested. The cleaning outcome of simulated organic plaque in percentage per planimetrical field (APP) was blind-assessed with PPI. All clinical and robot data underwent statistical analysis by K-S-test, one-sample-t-test and Agreement Rate AR of plaque removal.
Results: Individual clinical plaque control pattern at two surfaces and two risk areas per tooth were well reproduced by robot brushing movements. The Agreement rate of plaque removal by separated brushing movements at smooth surfaces was 85–100 % (TB1) and 89-99 % (TB2); at risk fields next to gum line 84-98 % (TB1) and 88-94 % (TB2). The single tooth analysis revealed best AR for teeth 42 (TB1 83-99 %), 42 (TB2 81-98 %) and 47 (TB2 75-98 %). Canines 43 exhibited the least of AR 41 % for both brushes.
Conclusions: Robot toothbrushing with formulation of organic plaque, simulating bio-physical parameters of natural plaque, is concordant with clinical plaque control at all teeth and planimetrical fields. The clinically validated plaque simulation is recommended for complex dry and wet robot testing.
Methods: Clinical programme: After ethical approval (EK-UWH 552007), professional tooth cleaning and 3-day-plaque-regrowth, 22 calibrated subjects used in RCT video-supported horizontal, rotating and vertical brushing movements for 20s buccally/20s lingually at 9 teeth 32 – 47 with force 3.5N. Toothbrushes Dr. Best medium (TB1) and Interdent medium (TB2) (GlaxoSmithKline, Munich, Germany) were tested. Stained plaque was photographed and blind-coded at 18 planimetrical fields and 10 risk fields using modified Navy-Plaque-Index (Lang et al. 2011) with PPI-Codes 0-1(<50 %)-2(>50 %) per field.
Robot programme: Same brushes and techniques were tested. The cleaning outcome of simulated organic plaque in percentage per planimetrical field (APP) was blind-assessed with PPI. All clinical and robot data underwent statistical analysis by K-S-test, one-sample-t-test and Agreement Rate AR of plaque removal.
Results: Individual clinical plaque control pattern at two surfaces and two risk areas per tooth were well reproduced by robot brushing movements. The Agreement rate of plaque removal by separated brushing movements at smooth surfaces was 85–100 % (TB1) and 89-99 % (TB2); at risk fields next to gum line 84-98 % (TB1) and 88-94 % (TB2). The single tooth analysis revealed best AR for teeth 42 (TB1 83-99 %), 42 (TB2 81-98 %) and 47 (TB2 75-98 %). Canines 43 exhibited the least of AR 41 % for both brushes.
Conclusions: Robot toothbrushing with formulation of organic plaque, simulating bio-physical parameters of natural plaque, is concordant with clinical plaque control at all teeth and planimetrical fields. The clinically validated plaque simulation is recommended for complex dry and wet robot testing.
