A Singh1, A Daing, J Dixit. 1. Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dental Sciences, C.S.M. Medical University (Erstwhile KGMC), Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. draparna24@yahoo.in
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brushing and flossing are the most widely accepted procedures, the 'gold standard', for controlling bacterial plaque, but these mechanical methods have limitations. Based on results derived from several clinical trials, essential oil (EO) mouthrinse (Listerine(®)) and a chlorhexidine mouthrinse have been accepted by ADA to be used as an adjunct to routine mechanical oral hygiene measures however, both of them are associated with side effects, therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the antiplaque efficacy of a new herbal formulation as compared to an EO and chlorhexidine rinse. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The study was a single blind parallel randomized controlled trial involving four groups. 48 volunteers refrained from all oral hygiene measures for 4 days, but rinsed instead twice daily with 10 ml of a herbal (HM), EO, chlorhexidine (CHX) or a placebo (PL) solution. Plaque index and plaque area (PA) was assessed on Day 4. RESULTS: The HM and EO showed a significant inhibition of plaque regrowth compared to PL (P<0.001), but the lowest values of PI and PA were obtained with CHX. Statistically significant difference in plaque parameters was observed when CHX was compared to HM and EO, and HM to EO rinse. CONCLUSION: The new herbal mouthrinse had a promising plaque inhibitory potential but it not as efficacious as chlorhexidine in preventing plaque regrowth.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Brushing and flossing are the most widely accepted procedures, the 'gold standard', for controlling bacterial plaque, but these mechanical methods have limitations. Based on results derived from several clinical trials, essential oil (EO) mouthrinse (Listerine(®)) and a chlorhexidine mouthrinse have been accepted by ADA to be used as an adjunct to routine mechanical oral hygiene measures however, both of them are associated with side effects, therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the antiplaque efficacy of a new herbal formulation as compared to an EO and chlorhexidine rinse. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The study was a single blind parallel randomized controlled trial involving four groups. 48 volunteers refrained from all oral hygiene measures for 4 days, but rinsed instead twice daily with 10 ml of a herbal (HM), EO, chlorhexidine (CHX) or a placebo (PL) solution. Plaque index and plaque area (PA) was assessed on Day 4. RESULTS: The HM and EO showed a significant inhibition of plaque regrowth compared to PL (P<0.001), but the lowest values of PI and PA were obtained with CHX. Statistically significant difference in plaque parameters was observed when CHX was compared to HM and EO, and HM to EO rinse. CONCLUSION: The new herbal mouthrinse had a promising plaque inhibitory potential but it not as efficacious as chlorhexidine in preventing plaque regrowth.
Authors: Joe Latimer; Jodie L Munday; Kara M Buzza; Sarah Forbes; Prem K Sreenivasan; Andrew J McBain Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 3.605