| Subject | Predicate | Object | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| pubmed-article:8003238 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0022877 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1707455 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0183975 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0490733 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0444454 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0205324 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:issue | 3 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:dateCreated | 1994-7-20 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:abstractText | The Colgate Plus Rippled Bristles toothbrush and the Oral-B 40 toothbrush were compared using a laboratory device designed to stimulate clinical toothbrushing motions and pressures and measure interproximal access efficacy. The toothbrushing time was sixty seconds for each vertical or horizontal toothbrushing sequence and for each of the three brushing weights tested (250, 500 or 750 grams). Interproximal access efficacy was determined by measuring the maximum width of the brushing stroke on pressure-sensitive paper placed around simulated anterior or posterior teeth. Twenty-four toothbrushes of each design were evaluated for each toothbrushing motion, tooth shape and toothbrushing weight. With vertical toothbrushing motions, the Colgate Rippled toothbrush had significantly higher (p < 0.001) interproximal access efficacy means compared to the Oral-B 40 toothbrush, on anterior tooth shapes at the 250 and 500 grams of brushing weights and on posterior tooth shapes at all of the brushing weights tested. Using the horizontal toothbrushing motion on anterior teeth, the interproximal access efficacy for the Colgate Rippled toothbrush was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the Oral-B 40 toothbrush at 250 and 500 grams of brushing weights. With horizontal toothbrushing across posterior-shaped teeth, interproximal access efficacy values for the Colgate Rippled toothbrush were significantly higher (p < 0.05-0.001) than the Oral-B 40 toothbrush at all of the brushing weights tested. When the various parameters tested were combined for all brushing weights, both brushing motions or both tooth shapes, interproximal access efficacy means for the Colgate Rippled toothbrush were higher (p < 0.05-0.001) than the combined means for the Oral-B toothbrush. When all factors tested were combined, total interproximal access efficacy for the Colgate Rippled toothbrush was significantly superior (p<0.001) to the Oral-B 40 toothbrush. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:citationSubset | D | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:issn | 0895-8831 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:YankellS LSL | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:EmlingR CRC | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:ShiXX | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:issnType | lld:pubmed | |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:volume | 4 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:pagination | 82-4 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:dateRevised | 2007-11-15 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8003238-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8003238-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8003238-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8003238-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:year | 1993 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:articleTitle | Laboratory interproximal access efficacy comparison of a rippled bristles toothbrush and a flat manual toothbrush. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:affiliation | University of Pennsylvania School of Dental Medicine, Philadelphia. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8003238 | pubmed:publicationType | Comparative Study | lld:pubmed |