Comparative Effects of Bioelectric and Manual Toothbrushing on Acrylic Denture Teeth: Surface Integrity and Wear Analysis

58% less surface roughening than a traditional manual brush
Shop Great Gums Read the Full Report

Peer-reviewed · PLoS One 2026 · Columbia University College of Dental Medicine

What was tested

Two years of brushing, reproduced in a lab

Thirty-six acrylic (PMMA) denture teeth were split into three matched groups of twelve and mounted in a brushing simulator. Each was brushed for 20,000 strokes, roughly two years of home cleaning, under a fixed 200 g load, using a standard fluoride toothpaste slurry rather than a gentle denture paste, to mirror how most people actually clean.

GroupsManual, bioelectric OFF, bioelectric ON
Strokes20,000 (about 2 years of daily use)
Load200 g, held constant across groups
MeasuredSurface roughness, weight loss, microscopy
Brushing simulator holding a denture tooth under a weighted brush head
The difference is the current.
Because the OFF and ON groups used the same brush, the gap between them isolates the effect of the bioelectrical current itself, not the bristles or the motor.
What the study found

Three results, measured three ways

1 Reduces Surface Roughening
58%
less surface roughening than a manual brush (p<0.05)
2 Preserves the Material
0%
measurable material lost after two years of brushing (p = 0.71)
3 Ends Smoother
1.84µm
final surface roughness, versus 2.23 µm for a manual brush
See it up close

Drag to compare the same surface after 20,000 strokes

Two denture-tooth surfaces at up to 200× magnification. Drag the handle to move between them. Scale bar = 200 µm.

Denture surface after manual brushing, showing deep parallel scratches
Denture surface after bioelectric brushing, more uniform
Manual Bioelectric ON
Box plot of surface roughness before and after brushing
The numbers

Surface roughness, before and after

GroupBeforeAfter
Manual brush1.542.23
Bioelectric, current OFF1.482.16
Bioelectric, current ON1.551.84

Mean roughness (Ra, µm). All groups started statistically level; only the current-on group avoided a statistically significant rise.

The conclusion

When activated, the bioelectric toothbrush produced statistically significantly less surface roughness on the acrylic teeth compared to the manual toothbrush and the bioelectric toothbrush in its inactive state (turned off), underscoring its effectiveness in minimizing wear and maintaining surface integrity.

Based on mean surface roughness (Ra) change after 20,000 brushing strokes (about 2 years), with no measurable material loss in any group.

Proven gentler in the lab

Read the research. Try the brush.

Read the peer-reviewed paper in full, or bring the bioelectric toothbrush into your own routine.

Read the Full Report Shop Great Gums

Pimenta LA, Nowik CN, Zeinali S, Kim YW. Comparative effects of bioelectric and manual toothbrushing on acrylic denture teeth: surface integrity and wear analysis. PLoS One. 2026;21(7):e0352019.