%0 Journal Article
%1 deinzer2023it
%A Deinzer, Renate
%A Eidenhardt, Zdenka
%A Sohrabi, Keywan
%A Stenger, Manuel
%A Kraft, Dominik
%A Sick, Bernhard
%A Götz-Hahn, Franz
%A Bottenbruch, Carlotta
%A Berneburg, Nils
%A Weik, Ulrike
%D 2023
%J Research Square
%K imported itegpub isac-www
%T It is the habit not the handle that affects tooth brushing. Results of a randomised counterbalanced cross over study
%U https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3491691/v1
%X Objective:
To assess the effect of the toothbrush handle on video-observed toothbrushing behaviour and toothbrushing effectiveness

Methods:
This is a randomized counterbalanced cross-over study. N = 50 university students brushed their teeth at two occasions, one week apart, using either a commercial ergonomically designed manual toothbrush (MT) or Brushalyze V1 (BV1), a manual toothbrush with a thick cylindrical handle without any specific ergonomic features. Brushing behaviour was video-analysed. Plaque was assessed at the second occasion immediately after brushing. Participants directly compared the two brushes regarding their handling and compared them to the brushed they used at home.

Results:
The study participants found the BV1 significantly more cumbersome than the M1 or their brush at home. (p < 0.05). However, correlation analyses revealed a strong consistency of brushing behavior with the two brushes (0.71 < r < 0.91). Means differed only slightly (all d < 0.36). These differences became statistically significant only for the brushing time at inner surfaces (d = 0.31 p = 0.03) and horizontal movements at inner surfaces (d = 0.35, p = 0.02). Plaque levels at the gingival margins did not differ while slightly more plaque persisted at the more coronal aspects of the crown after brushing with BV1 (d = 0.592; p 0.042)

Discussion:
The results of the study indicate that the brushing handle does not play a major role in brushing behavior or brushing effectiveness.