Votes - 2, Average rating: 3.5 ( )

Manafacture: Waterpik Technologies File size: 635.34 kb File name: Language of manual:

Therefore, expectations of similar clinical outcomes on products of differing brands cannot be assumed. References 1. Goldie MP. Power toothbrushing: An easy, effective way to improve oral health. Contemporary Oral Hygiene 2002; July/August: 28-33. 2. Warren PR et al. A practice-based study of a power toothbrush: Assessment of effectiveness and acceptance. JADA 2000; 131: 389-394. 3. Jahn C. Making patient-centered self-care recommendations: Automatic toothbrushes. J Practical Hyg 2001; 10(5): 38-39, 42. 4. Bowen D. An evidence-based review of power toothbrushes. Compend Contin Educ Oral Hyg 2002; 9: 3-16. 5. Heanue M et al. Manual versus powered toothbrushing for oral health (Cochrane Review) In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2003. Oxford: Update Software. 6. Jahn CA. Automated oral hygiene self-care devices: Making evidence-based choices to improve client outcomes. J Dent Hyg 2001; 75: 171-186. 7. Larrabee JH. The changing role of the consumer in health care quality. J Nurs Care Qual 1995; 9: 8-15. 8. Lang WP et al. Preventive behaviors as correlates of periodontal health status. J Public Health Dent 1995; 55(1): 10-17. 9. Hawkins BF et al. Duration of toothbrushing for effective plaque control. Quintessence Int 1986; 17: 361-365. 10. Walmsley AD. The electric toothbrush: A review. B Dent J 1997; 182: 209-218. 11. Heasman PA et al. Power toothbrushes: A review of clinical trials. J Clin Periodontol 1999; 26: 407-420. 12. Brothwell DJ et al. An update of mechanical oral hygiene practices: Evidence based recommendations for disease prevention. Can Dent Assoc J 1998; 64(4): 295-304. 13. Blanco VL et al. In vitro effect of the SenSonic® toothbrush on Treponema denticola. J Clin Periodontol 1997; 24: 318-323. 14. MacNeill S et al. Sonic and mechanical toothbrushes: An in vitro study showing altered microbial surface structures but lack of effect on viability. J Clin Periodontol 1998; 25: 988-993. 15. Barnes C. A clinical evaluation of the effect on gingivitis and plaque reduction of the SenSonic® plaque removal instrument. Abstract presented at ADHA Annual Session, 1995. 16. Zimmer S et al. Clinical study of the effectiveness of two sonic toothbrushes. J Clin Dent 1999; 11: 24-27. 17. Hefferren J et al. Assessment of the stain removal cleaning power of the SenSonic® plaque removal instrument in beagles. J Dent Res 1996; 75: 86. 18. Barnes C et al. A comparison of a Waterpik® dual motor power toothbrush and a manual toothbrush in affecting interproximal bleeding reduction and dental biofilm accumulation. J Clin Dent 2003; 14: 49-52. 19. In-house data on file. 6 PN 20007016-ART © 2003 Water Pik, Inc. FN 20007016ART-F AA Post Test for Course #03-03 Power Brushes: An Effective Alternative 1. What features may influence individual preference for a power brush? a) Timer b) Handle size c) Brush head configuration d) All of the above 2. Which type of individual would NOT be a candidate for a power brush? a) Orthodontic b) Periodontal maintenance c) Edentulous d) Physically challenged 3. When compared to a manual toothbrush, the SynchroSonic™ Plus power toothbrush: a) Was better at removing biofilm but not at reducing gingivitis b) Was better at reducing gingivitis but not at removing biofilm c) Equal to the manual brush in biofilm removal and gingivitis reduction d) Better than the manual brush at biofilm removal and gingivitis reduction 4. When the SenSonic® toothbrush and Sonicare® toothbrush were compared to a manual toothbrush, what were the results? a) The SenSonic® toothbrush was superior in all measures to the Sonicare® toothbrush and the manual toothbrush b) The Sonicare® toothbrush was superior in all measures to the SenSonic® toothbrush and the manual toothbrush c) The SenSonic® toothbrush and Sonicare® toothbrush were both superior to the manual toothbrush d) The manual toothbrush was superior to both the SenSonic® toothbrush and Sonicare® toothbrush 5. Which statement is true about the power toothbrush review by the Cochrane Collaboration? a) One weakness of the study was grouping by modes of action b) 92 studies were included in the meta-analysis c) Randomized clinical trials were excluded d) Studies need to be a minimum of 6 months for inclusion Obtaining Continuing Education Credits Waterpik Technologies is designated as an Approved PACE Program Provider by the Academy of General Dentistry. The formal continuing education programs of this provider are accepted by the AGD for Fellowship, Mastership, and membership maintenance credits. Approval does not imply acceptance by a state or provincial board of dentistry. The current term of approval extends from 04-05-1998-05-31-2006. Credits: 1 hour If you have questions about CE requirements in your state or province, please consult your regulatory board. Directions • Fill out the Waterpik CE Registration Form and Answer Sheet. • Answers should be logged on the answer sheet. Please make a copy of the post test and your answer sheet to retain for your records....

Download now

Please, enter two numbers from picture: