Shamila K Shetty1, Karanth Sharath2, Santhosh Shenoy3, Chandini Sreekumar4, Rashmi N Shetty5, Thomas Biju6. 1. Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte University, Mangalore, Karnataka India, Phone: +919901121270, e-mail: shetty.shamila@gmail.com. 2. Professor, Department of Periodontics, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte University, Mangalore, Karnataka, India. 3. Reader, Department of Periodontics, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte University, Mangalore, Karnataka, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte University, Mangalore, Karnataka India. 5. Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics, AJ Institute of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India. 6. Professor and Head, Department of Periodontics, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte University, Mangalore, Karnataka India.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate and compare the effcacy of preprocedural mouthrinses (chlorhexidine digluconate and tea tree oil) in reducing microbial content of aerosol product during ultrasonic scaling procedures by viable bacterial count. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: It was a randomized single blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Sixty subjects were randomly assigned to rinse 10 ml of any one of the mouthrinses (chlorhexidine digluconate or tea tree oil or distilled water). Ultrasonic scaling was done for a period of 10 minutes in presence of trypticase soy agar plates placed at standardized distance. Plates were then sent for microbiological evaluation for the aerosol produced. RESULTS: This study showed that all the antiseptic mouthwashes signifcantly reduced the bacterial colony forming units (CFUs) in aerosol samples. Chlorhexidine rinses were found to be superior to tea tree when used preprocedurally in reducing aerolized bacteria. CONCLUSION: This study advocates preprocedural dural rinsing with an effective antimicrobial mouthrinse during any dental treatment which generates aerosols, reduces the risk of cross-contamination with infectious agents in the dental operatory. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The aerolization of oral microbes occurring during dental procedures can potentially result in cross-contamination in the dental operatory and transmission of infectious agents to both dental professionals and patient. It is reasonable to assume therefore, that any stratagem for reducing the viable bacterial content of these aerosols could lower the risk of cross-contamination.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To evaluate and compare the effcacy of preprocedural mouthrinses (chlorhexidine digluconate and tea tree oil) in reducing microbial content of aerosol product during ultrasonic scaling procedures by viable bacterial count. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: It was a randomized single blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty subjects were randomly assigned to rinse 10 ml of any one of the mouthrinses (chlorhexidine digluconate or tea tree oil or distilled water). Ultrasonic scaling was done for a period of 10 minutes in presence of trypticase soy agar plates placed at standardized distance. Plates were then sent for microbiological evaluation for the aerosol produced. RESULTS: This study showed that all the antiseptic mouthwashes signifcantly reduced the bacterial colony forming units (CFUs) in aerosol samples. Chlorhexidine rinses were found to be superior to tea tree when used preprocedurally in reducing aerolized bacteria. CONCLUSION: This study advocates preprocedural dural rinsing with an effective antimicrobial mouthrinse during any dental treatment which generates aerosols, reduces the risk of cross-contamination with infectious agents in the dental operatory. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The aerolization of oral microbes occurring during dental procedures can potentially result in cross-contamination in the dental operatory and transmission of infectious agents to both dental professionals and patient. It is reasonable to assume therefore, that any stratagem for reducing the viable bacterial content of these aerosols could lower the risk of cross-contamination.