Comparative Evaluation Of Surface Roughness After Using Normal Toothbrush Vs Charcoal Toothbrush

Authors

  • Chandan Panigrahi
  • Vignesh R

Keywords:

Activated charcoal toothbrush, Surface roughness, Tooth abrasion, Enamel wear, Oral hygiene, Tooth brushing simulation, Dental plaque control, Primary teeth, Permanent teeth, Profilometry

Abstract

Introduction: Charcoal toothbrushes resemble normal toothbrushes in design but incorporate activated charcoal-infused bristles. Charcoal toothbrushes claim to offer additional benefits due to the activated charcoal in their bristles. Charcoal is believed to have adsorptive properties, meaning it can attract and bind certain substances onto its surface. Charcoal toothbrushes are marketed as natural teeth whiteners due to their activated charcoal content. The abrasive nature of charcoal particles may aid in removing superficial stains, providing a potential benefit for individuals seeking a brighter smile. Materials and Methods: permanent and primary tooth samples were subjected to brushing simulation for 10000 cycles (approximately 1 year of brushing) using both normal toothbrush and charcoal toothbrush. Their Pre and Post surface roughness values were evaluated. Results: There was a significant increase in the surface roughness after using the charcoal infused toothbrush. Charcoal toothbrushes assert that the activated charcoal particles in the bristles can help eliminate toxins and reduce bacterial growth in the mouth, potentially promoting fresher breath and improved gum health. Conclusion: The results of this study concluded the abrasive nature of charcoal may increase surface roughness of teeth after prolonged use.,

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AlDhawi RZ, AlNaqa NH, Tashkandi OE, Gamal AT, AlShammery HF, Eltom SM. Antimicrobial Efficacy of Charcoal vs. Non-charcoal Toothbrushes: A Randomized Controlled Study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2020 Nov 24;10(6):719–23.

2. Thamke MV, Beldar A, Thakkar P, Murkute S, Ranmare V, Hudwekar A. Comparison of Bacterial Contamination and Antibacterial Efficacy in Bristles of Charcoal Toothbrushes versus Noncharcoal Toothbrushes: A Microbiological Study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2018 Jul-Sep;9(3):463–7.

3. Naik SP, Punathil S, Shetty P, Jayanti I, Jalaluddin M, Avijeeta A. Effectiveness of Different Bristle Designs of Toothbrushes and Periodontal Status among Fixed Orthodontic Patients: A Double-blind Crossover Design. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2018 Feb 1;19(2):150–5.

4. Hollaar VRY. [Effectiveness of electric or manual toothbrush in dental plaque removal in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances]. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2021 Oct;128(10):475–8.

5. Marçal FF, Mota de Paulo JP, Barreto LG, de Carvalho Guerra LM, Silva PG de B. Effectiveness of orthodontic toothbrush versus conventional toothbrush on plaque and gingival index reduction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Dent Hyg. 2022 Feb;20(1):87–99.

6. Saruttichart T, Chantarawaratit PO, Leevailoj C, Thanyasrisung P, Pitiphat W, Matangkasombut O. Effectiveness of a motionless ultrasonic toothbrush in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances. Angle Orthod. 2017 Mar;87(2):279–85.

7. Deery C, Heanue M, Deacon S, Robinson PG, Walmsley AD, Worthington H, et al. The effectiveness of manual versus powered toothbrushes for dental health: a systematic review. J Dent. 2004 Mar;32(3):197–211.

8. Kini V, Yadav S, Rijhwani JA, Farooqui A, Joshi AA, Phad SG. Comparison of Plaque Removal and Wear between Charcoal Infused Bristle and Nylon Bristle Toothbrushes: A Randomized Clinical Crossover Study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019 Mar 1;20(3):377–84.

9. Kaneyasu Y, Shigeishi H, Maehara T, Fukada-Sambuichi E, Amano H, Sugiyama M. Measurement of bristle splaying of toothbrushes using digital imaging and evaluation of plaque removal efficacy over 3 months: A randomized controlled trial (RCT). Int J Dent Hyg. 2020 May;18(2):173–81.

10. Langa GPJ, Muniz FWMG, Wagner TP, Silva CFE, Rösing CK. ANTI-PLAQUE AND ANTI-GINGIVITIS EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT BRISTLE STIFFNESS AND END-SHAPE TOOTHBRUSHES ON INTERPROXIMAL SURFACES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW WITH META-ANALYSIS. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2021 Jun;21(2):101548.

11. Zinn MK, Schages L, Bockmühl D. The Toothbrush Microbiome: Impact of User Age, Period of Use and Bristle Material on the Microbial Communities of Toothbrushes. Microorganisms [Internet]. 2020 Sep 9;8(9). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8091379

12. Fernandes AJ, Agnihotri R. Evaluation of the efficacy of a charcoal-based tooth whitening dentifrice on coffee stains: an in vitro study. Can J Dent Hyg. 2023 Jun;57(2):123–31.

13. Forouzanfar A, Hasanpour P, Yazdandoust Y, Bagheri H, Mohammadipour HS. Evaluating the Effect of Active Charcoal-Containing Toothpaste on Color Change, Microhardness, and Surface Roughness of Tooth Enamel and Resin Composite Restorative Materials. Int J Dent. 2023 May 9;2023:6736623

Downloads

Published

2025-12-20

How to Cite

1.
Panigrahi C, R V. Comparative Evaluation Of Surface Roughness After Using Normal Toothbrush Vs Charcoal Toothbrush. J Neonatal Surg [Internet]. 2025 Dec. 20 [cited 2026 May 9];14(33S):745-9. Available from: https://jneonatalsurg.com/index.php/jns/article/view/10083

Issue

Vol. 14 No. 33S (2025): Journal of Neonatal Surgery

Section

Original Article

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

You are free to:

  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

Terms:

  • Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  • No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.