Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 review

EFFECTIVENESS OF DISINFECTION METHODS FOR TOOTHBRUSHES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

1Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
4Institutions déclarées
2Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : hk, us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate and compare the effectiveness of various toothbrush disinfection methods. METHODS: Four databases were searched for studies published between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2024. Following risk of bias assessment, meta- and subgroup analyses were performed to estimate the pooled effectiveness of chemical disinfection, home remedies and physical disinfection. RESULTS: Forty-one studies comprising 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 33 non-RCTs were included. The 3 strategies significantly reduced bacterial load compared to controls (P < .001), with home remedies showing the greatest overall effect with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -2.97 (95% CI: -4.33 to -1.61). Subgroup analyses revealed that 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX) demonstrated an extremely large effect (SMD = -3.17, 95% CI: -5.32 to -1.02; P < .001), while 50% white vinegar treatment also demonstrated extremely large effects (SMD = -2.52, 95% CI: -4.50 to -0.55; P < .001). Ultraviolet (UV)-based disinfection exhibited statistically significant effects (SMD = -1.79, 95% CI: -3.52 to -0.07; P < .001). Despite overall effectiveness, substantial heterogeneity (I >75%) and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) that included zero were observed across studies. Overall, the certainty of evidence was deemed very low. CONCLUSIONS: The 3 strategies effectively reduce toothbrush contamination. CHX remains the reference standard, while home remedies and physical disinfection show promise as accessible alternatives. However, due to high heterogeneity and risk of bias across studies, these finding should be interpreted with caution. Future research requires high-quality, standardized RCTs to confirm clinical efficacy and optimize protocols.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
EFFECTIVENESS OF DISINFECTION METHODS FOR TOOTHBRUSHES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
Date Crossref
01/06/2026
Éditeur
Elsevier BV
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchInfection Control in HealthcareLegionella and Acanthamoeba research

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.