In an era of rapid digitalization and increased attention to sustainability, modern dentistry is developing as one of the most dynamic areas of healthcare, requiring adaptation of preventive tools.
In this context, a review that examined the use of silicone toothbrushes and other silicone oral hygiene aids represents not merely a summary assessment — it is an attempt to critically juxtapose clinical effectiveness, periodontal tissue safety and ecological characteristics to develop reproducible recommendations; the analytical synthesis revealed heterogeneity of the evidence base and an emphasized need for standardization of methods and validation of protocols.
The review demonstrates that silicone functions not only as a material but also as a design element determining the clinical and operational characteristics of devices — from reduction of mechanical abrasion to decreasing the risk of injury to gingival tissues; two controlled clinical trials reported comparable effectiveness of removing supragingival plaque by silicone and nylon brushes in adults and in children, one study indicated improved hygiene outcomes with use of a silicone finger‑brush attachment in adults who previously practiced finger cleaning, which is important for adapting prevention in specific patient groups.
The clinical effectiveness of silicone devices correlates with characteristics such as silicone stiffness, head length, bristle configuration — these parameters affect contact with occlusal and interdental surfaces, distribution of pressure along the gingival margin and the ability to remove biofilm with different cleaning techniques; the softness and flexibility of silicone bristles are described in a number of studies as factors that reduce abrasion and the risk of mechanical periodontal injury, especially in patients with incorrect brushing technique.
To translate design decisions into clinically justified recommendations, standardization of testing is necessary — uniform outcome measures such as plaque indices, gingival inflammation index, bleeding on probing, measurements of hard tissue abrasion, as well as long observational periods to assess tolerability and long‑term effect; in vitro methods and wear modeling must correlate with clinical outcomes, and validation protocols — include assessment of reuse, effects on the microbial biofilm and material resistance to detergency.
Data from the review suggest benefits for specific demographic groups: in children silicone tooth and gum brushes demonstrate comparable plaque removal on the occlusal surfaces of partially erupted teeth while simultaneously reducing the risk of mechanical damage during developing motor skills; for elderly patients and individuals with impaired motor function or limited manual dexterity silicone swabs and optimized designs may provide a gentler and more convenient alternative, improving compliance and enabling personalization of preventive strategies.
Environmental aspects are brought to the forefront in the review: a life cycle assessment identified that products with silicone bristles and a polypropylene body may have lower environmental impacts compared with equivalent nylon models, while a combination of silicone bristles with lightweight handles and replaceable heads theoretically reduces the carbon footprint of use — an important factor for developing sustainable dentistry within healthcare systems and among conscious consumers.
The transition from preliminary results to clinical recommendations requires conducting randomized controlled trials with adequate power and multicenter design, implementation of international standards for testing — including assessment of microbial contamination, ease of cleaning and sterilization in home conditions, effectiveness with dry and wet cleaning, as well as integration of economic and environmental analyses; key stakeholders — research centers, industry, donors and global health organizations — should collaborate to create prototypes, organize transnational pilot programs and scalable implementation in low‑ and middle‑income countries.
Given the available evidence it is advisable for clinicians to consider silicone devices as a potentially useful tool for specific patients — children, individuals with increased periodontal sensitivity, patients with limited manual function — provided they are informed about the current limitations of the evidence base; for researchers it is recommended to standardize outcomes, include objective clinical markers (plaque index, gingival index, bleeding on probing), biomechanical measurements of abrasion, microbiological tests and assessment of patient acceptability, and additionally to conduct economic evaluation and LCA to support sustainable solutions.
The scoping review confirms the potential of silicone as a component of preventive oral care products, capable of providing gentler, adaptable and potentially environmentally justified solutions provided further standardization of methods and rigorous clinical research are conducted; integration of findings into practice will require interdisciplinary cooperation, unification of assessment methods and orientation to the needs of target populations.
In the era of rapid digitalization modern dentistry is developing as one of the most dynamic fields of medicine, intensively
Modern dentistry is developing as one of the most dynamic fields of medicine, rapidly integrating digital technologies and interdisciplinary approaches.
OTEXE.COM uses cookies to personalize the services and improve the usability of the site. If you do not want to use cookies, please disable them in your browser settings.
