Manual versus sonic powered tooth brushing in patients with intellectual disability (Cepillado manual versus cepillado eléctrico para la salud oral en pacientes con discapacidad intelectual leve y moderada)
Not Applicable
Completed
- Conditions
- Periodontal healthDigestive SystemGingivitis and periodontal diseases
- Registration Number
- ISRCTN16336355
- Lead Sponsor
- Philips Oral Healthcare
- Brief Summary
2016 results in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27105981 (added 23/01/2019)
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Completed
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 60
Inclusion Criteria
1. Adults from 18 to 65 years
2. Having ID (Schalock et al. 2010) categorized as limit [intelligence quotient (IQ), <70], mild (IQ 50-69), or moderate (35-49)
3. Being part of psychosocial support groups under the supervision of a trained monitor (special educators, with different university degrees in Pedagogy)
Exclusion Criteria
1. Pregnancy or breastfeeding
2. Less than 18 teeth
3. Orthodontic treatment at the time of recruitment
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method The primary outcome variable was the gingival index (Loe & Silness 1963), which was evaluated at four sites per tooth in two randomly (by coin toss) selected quadrants (one in the upper jaw, one in the lower jaw, contralateral) (Bentley & Disney 1995), by a single calibrated and trained examiner, blinded to the group allocation.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method <br> 1. The plaque index (PlI) (Silness & Loe 1964) was evaluated in the same way<br> 2. The presence of calculus (Ccl) was evaluated at the same teeth and sites, dichotomously<br> 3. The presence of adverse effects was assessed by a visual inspection at each study visit<br>