Background: Tooth brushing is most commonly practiced oral hygiene procedure. The hardness, size of bristles or manner of brushing may affect enamel, dentin and surface properties of restorative materials. Powered and Ultrasonic toothbrushes are new additions to oral hygiene aids and their abrasive potential must be determined before incorporating them into daily use. Aim and Objectives: To evaluate and compare the abrasive effect of Ultrasonic and powered toothbrush on the surface roughness of enamel, Type II and IX GC Fuji cement. Materials and Methods: The study included 36extracted primary teeth divided into three groups based on the surface treated: Enamel, Type II GIC, and Type IX GIC. These were further subdivided into two groups based on the brush used: Powered and Ultrasonic toothbrush, used over period of 7days, after which the analysis was done for surface micro hardness and surface wear. Results: On analysis, the enamel group showed maximum roughness (Enamel=1.3μm; GCII=0.32μm and GC IX=0.19μm) measured at the baseline. Further analysis after 7 days of brushing showed that the use of powered toothbrushes (Type II=0.45μm; Type IX=0.35μm) showed significantly greater surface roughness compared to Ultrasonic toothbrush (Type II=0.26μm; Type IX=0.17μm) in all the three groups, thereby showing a significantly greater change in Ra for powered toothbrushes. Also, the type II GIC had greater surface roughness compared to type IX GIC. Conclusion: The results indicate that the use of powered toothbrushes causes significantly greater wear of the tooth surface than the use of ultrasonic toothbrushes on enamel and GIC.
IJCR is following an instant policy on rejection those received papers with plagiarism rate of more than 20%. So, All of authors and contributors must check their papers before submission to making assurance of following our anti-plagiarism policies.
