Powered toothbrushes (PT) with oscillating-rotating motion may help reduce dentin hypersensitivity (HYP) at sites of gingival recession more effectively than manual toothbrushes (MT), according to a study recently published in the Journal of Dentistry.
However, electric brushes should not yet be recommended specifically for reducing HYP in patients with gingival recession type 1 (RT1) until additional research confirms their effectiveness, the authors wrote.
“The tested PT appears safe for use in patients with RT1 and may support symptom stabilisation over time,” wrote the authors, led by Sophie Meister of the University of Kiel Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology in Germany (J Dent, May 12, 2026, Vol. 177, 106744).
To examine the long-term effects of PT and MT on HYP in teeth with RT1 gingival recession, 90 adults were assigned to either a PT group or an MT group. Participants brushed twice daily using the same fluoride toothpaste, and hypersensitivity was assessed in 180 index teeth, with two teeth evaluated per participant. HYP was measured at baseline and annually for over three years using both a dental probe (HYP-S) and an air-jet stimulus (HYP-L), the study’s authors wrote.
Clinical assessments, including probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, gingival recession, plaque indices, and hypersensitivity, were performed at baseline and at 12-, 24-, and 36-month follow-ups. All participants received standardized instructions on brushing frequency, duration, surface coverage, and pressure while continuing their usual brushing motion, and no additional oral hygiene products were recommended.
Over the three-year study period, participants using the oscillating-rotating PT experienced a significantly greater reduction in air-jet-induced dentin HYP than those using an MT (p = 0.014). At baseline, there were no significant differences between the PT and MT groups for either HYP-L or tactile HYP, with median HYP-L values of 1.85 and 1.9, respectively, and median HYP-S values of 1.05 and 1.1, according to the study authors.
Furthermore, no significant between-group differences in HYP-L or HYP-S were observed at the 12-month or 24-month follow-ups, and changes in tactile hypersensitivity remained similar across all time intervals (all p > 0.05). However, by the end of the full observation period, the PT group showed a significantly greater reduction in HYP-L compared to the MT group, while tactile hypersensitivity still did not differ significantly between groups.
Nevertheless, the study had limitations. This was a secondary analysis of a trial designed to assess gingival recession rather than dentin HYP, so the HYP findings should be considered exploratory, the authors added.
“Powered brushing appears safe in this population but should not be recommended on the basis of hypersensitivity reduction until confirmed in a trial prospectively powered for that endpoint,” Meister and colleagues concluded.
