Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Effective plaque control is essential for improved oral health. Advancements in mechanical plaque removal using toothbrushes still continue. One such sophisticated intervention is the app-based toothbrush, a new innovative technology that helps to track the child\'s brushing habits.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of three different toothbrushes in children aged 6-8 years.
METHODS: A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted among primary school children with decayed missing filled teeth (dmft) score of ≤2. Baseline plaque score was collected using Turesky modification of the Quigley and Hein Index 1 week after oral prophylaxis. Children were randomly divided into three groups. Group I received conventional toothbrush (n = 25), group II received powered toothbrush (n = 25), and group III received app-based toothbrush (n = 25). Post-intervention plaque score, toothbrush wear and bite mark scores were done at the 15th, 30th, 45th and 90th day. Participant\'s opinion on their toothbrushes was evaluated using a questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS: App-based toothbrush showed maximum plaque reduction followed by powered and conventional toothbrush. Significant reduction in plaque score was seen at 30th-, 45th- and 90th-day follow-up in group II (<0.001) and group III (<0.001). There was no appreciable difference in the toothbrush wear and bite mark score between the three groups. Children preferred app-based toothbrush in spite of the complex nature of using it.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of three different toothbrushes in children aged 6-8 years.
METHODS: A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted among primary school children with decayed missing filled teeth (dmft) score of ≤2. Baseline plaque score was collected using Turesky modification of the Quigley and Hein Index 1 week after oral prophylaxis. Children were randomly divided into three groups. Group I received conventional toothbrush (n = 25), group II received powered toothbrush (n = 25), and group III received app-based toothbrush (n = 25). Post-intervention plaque score, toothbrush wear and bite mark scores were done at the 15th, 30th, 45th and 90th day. Participant\'s opinion on their toothbrushes was evaluated using a questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS: App-based toothbrush showed maximum plaque reduction followed by powered and conventional toothbrush. Significant reduction in plaque score was seen at 30th-, 45th- and 90th-day follow-up in group II (<0.001) and group III (<0.001). There was no appreciable difference in the toothbrush wear and bite mark score between the three groups. Children preferred app-based toothbrush in spite of the complex nature of using it.
摘要：
背景：有效的牙菌斑控制对于改善口腔健康至关重要。使用牙刷机械去除牙菌斑的进步仍在继续。其中一个复杂的干预措施是基于应用程序的牙刷，一种新的创新技术，有助于跟踪孩子的刷牙习惯。
目的：本研究的目的是评估三种不同牙刷对6-8岁儿童的牙菌斑清除效果。
方法：在腐烂缺失填充牙（dmft）评分≤2的小学儿童中进行了一项随机对照临床试验。口服预防后1周，使用Quigley和Hein指数的Turesky修饰收集基线斑块评分。患儿随机分为三组。第一组接受常规牙刷（n=25），第二组接受电动牙刷（n=25），第三组接受了基于app的牙刷(n=25).干预后斑块评分,牙刷磨损和咬痕评分在15号完成，30日,第45天和第90天。参与者对他们的牙刷的意见使用问卷进行评估。
结论：基于App的牙刷显示出最大的牙菌斑减少，其次是动力和常规牙刷。在30时观察到斑块评分显着降低-，第45天和第90天随访II组（<0.001）和III组（<0.001）。三组之间的牙刷磨损和咬痕评分没有明显差异。儿童更喜欢基于应用程序的牙刷，尽管使用它的复杂性。
目的：本研究的目的是评估三种不同牙刷对6-8岁儿童的牙菌斑清除效果。
方法：在腐烂缺失填充牙（dmft）评分≤2的小学儿童中进行了一项随机对照临床试验。口服预防后1周，使用Quigley和Hein指数的Turesky修饰收集基线斑块评分。患儿随机分为三组。第一组接受常规牙刷（n=25），第二组接受电动牙刷（n=25），第三组接受了基于app的牙刷(n=25).干预后斑块评分,牙刷磨损和咬痕评分在15号完成，30日,第45天和第90天。参与者对他们的牙刷的意见使用问卷进行评估。
结论：基于App的牙刷显示出最大的牙菌斑减少，其次是动力和常规牙刷。在30时观察到斑块评分显着降低-，第45天和第90天随访II组（<0.001）和III组（<0.001）。三组之间的牙刷磨损和咬痕评分没有明显差异。儿童更喜欢基于应用程序的牙刷，尽管使用它的复杂性。
