{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02937062937062937, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008391608391608392, 'mean_word_length': 5.445945945945946, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assessment of plaque control efficacy using two types of toothbrushes in young adults: an interventional crossover study.

OBJECTIVE
Evaluation of plaque removal efficacy of microfilamentous-short-headed toothbrushes as compared to conventional /traditional toothbrush METHOD: A total of 20 subjects meeting the inclusion criteria were considered. Selected subjects were divided into test and control groups. Initially, subjects were advised to refrain from brushing teeth for 24 hours, to determine the plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) at the baseline. Further, crossover observation between the groups were recorded based on short-headed toothbrush (Curaprox CS 5460), and traditional brushes (ultrasoft). Finally, a questionnaire survey was conducted to gather preferences and experiences of each subjects.


RESULTS
In terms of plaque removal, the short-headed toothbrush and the conventional toothbrush demonstrated comparable results. In terms of PI and GI, the intergroup comparison revealed no significant differences. (p = 0.878). Individual acceptability of the short-headed toothbrush was shown to be higher from the questionnaire survey.


CONCLUSION
It was observed that both toothbrushes showed similar efficacy. However, the subjects preferred short-headed toothbrush.


CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Short headed toothbrushes comprising a higher number of bristles can be recommended in terms of better oral hygiene.