{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01282051282051282, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002849002849002849, 'mean_word_length': 5.333333333333333, '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}}
The relative effectiveness of plaque removal by the Proxabrush and rubber cone stimulator.

The effectiveness of two agents in plaque removal from the proximal surfaces of teeth was studied in 30 subjects with large interproximal spaces. The Proxabrush was more effective than the rubber cone stimulator in its ability to remove proximal plaque, but neither achieved complete removal. Both agents cleaned incisor teeth better than posterior teeth, mesial surfaces better than distal surfaces, facial halves better than lingual halves and coronal halves better than apical halves of proximal surfaces. No differences in gingival health were detected. A majority of the patients preferred the Proxabrush.