- Email: [email protected]
Manual toothbrushes not obsolete
REPORTS OF C O U N C ILS A N D BUREAUS . . . VOLUME 68, FEBRUARY 1964 • 125/279
Manual toothbrushes not obsolete
C O U N C IL O N D E N T A L T H E R A P E U T IC S
Recent consumer advertising for one brand of electric powered toothbrush has headlined an illustration which in effect claims that the conventional type of man ually operated toothbrush is obsolete. In the opinion of the Council on Dental Therapeutics this claim is exaggerated and misleading and by its disparagement of a device useful in home oral hygiene programs, this claim is contrary to the public interest. The Council is not aware of published studies or evidence provided otherwise to the Council to justify the implied degree of superiority of the advertised product over the manually operated toothbrush. In fact, the data from some studies em phasize the ability of persons to maintain good oral hygiene through effective use of a conventional toothbrush if they pos sess reasonable dexterity and have been trained adequately in the proper use of the brush. It is the view of the Council as expressed in its Provisions for Accept ance of Products that products should be promoted on the basis of their demon strated usefulness rather than by dis paragement of other useful agents. Although the Council on Dental Ther apeutics has not yet established its formal program for the evaluation of powered toothbrushes, it has informally recognized certain electrically powered brushes as
safe and effective devices for cleaning the teeth. The following excerpt from the 1964 edition of Accepted Dental Reme dies provides some further information: There has recently been a wide interest in the use of electric toothbrushes as evidenced by the many studies in current dental literature and the large number of these devices appear ing on the market. . . . Because of the many possible variations, the Council is of the opin ion that these devices must be evaluated indi vidually. Each of them should be established as being safe for normal, unsupervised use. Safety should include freedom from the haz ards of electrical shock and freedom from damage to the soft and hard oral tissue. The device should also be capable of cleaning the oral cavity effectively and efficiently when used according to directions. Although the electric toothbrush may be of benefit in maintaining the cleanliness of the oral cavity of the normal individual, it ap pears to be especially useful for the partially handicapped who can not readily clean his teeth with the hand toothbrush or for the totally handicapped individual who must have his teeth brushed by an attendant.
It is anticipated that the Council’s further evaluation of these devices on the basis of reported clinical studies will assist the dentist in deciding what type of brush will best serve the needs of individual patients. In the meantime, it is unfortu nate when consumer advertising for a product promotes a concept which is con trary to professional judgment.
Manual toothbrushes not obsolete
C O U N C IL O N D E N T A L T H E R A P E U T IC S
Recent consumer advertising for one brand of electric powered toothbrush has headlined an illustration which in effect claims that the conventional type of man ually operated toothbrush is obsolete. In the opinion of the Council on Dental Therapeutics this claim is exaggerated and misleading and by its disparagement of a device useful in home oral hygiene programs, this claim is contrary to the public interest. The Council is not aware of published studies or evidence provided otherwise to the Council to justify the implied degree of superiority of the advertised product over the manually operated toothbrush. In fact, the data from some studies em phasize the ability of persons to maintain good oral hygiene through effective use of a conventional toothbrush if they pos sess reasonable dexterity and have been trained adequately in the proper use of the brush. It is the view of the Council as expressed in its Provisions for Accept ance of Products that products should be promoted on the basis of their demon strated usefulness rather than by dis paragement of other useful agents. Although the Council on Dental Ther apeutics has not yet established its formal program for the evaluation of powered toothbrushes, it has informally recognized certain electrically powered brushes as
safe and effective devices for cleaning the teeth. The following excerpt from the 1964 edition of Accepted Dental Reme dies provides some further information: There has recently been a wide interest in the use of electric toothbrushes as evidenced by the many studies in current dental literature and the large number of these devices appear ing on the market. . . . Because of the many possible variations, the Council is of the opin ion that these devices must be evaluated indi vidually. Each of them should be established as being safe for normal, unsupervised use. Safety should include freedom from the haz ards of electrical shock and freedom from damage to the soft and hard oral tissue. The device should also be capable of cleaning the oral cavity effectively and efficiently when used according to directions. Although the electric toothbrush may be of benefit in maintaining the cleanliness of the oral cavity of the normal individual, it ap pears to be especially useful for the partially handicapped who can not readily clean his teeth with the hand toothbrush or for the totally handicapped individual who must have his teeth brushed by an attendant.
It is anticipated that the Council’s further evaluation of these devices on the basis of reported clinical studies will assist the dentist in deciding what type of brush will best serve the needs of individual patients. In the meantime, it is unfortu nate when consumer advertising for a product promotes a concept which is con trary to professional judgment.