| Literature DB >> 27903262 |
Hayder Raad Abdulbaqi1,2, Wan Harun Himratul-Aznita3, Nor Adinar Baharuddin4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the author's earlier in vitro investigation, a combination of 0.25 mg/ml green tea and 7.82 mg/ml Salvadora persica L. aqueous extracts was found to exhibit significant synergistic anti-bacterial and anti-adherence effects against primary plaque colonizers biofilm. A clinical trial was needed to support these preliminary in vitro results and to investigate its efficacy as a mouthwash in the control of dental plaque.Entities:
Keywords: Clinical trial; Dental plaque; Mouthwash; Salvadora; Tea
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27903262 PMCID: PMC5131433 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-016-1487-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Description of interventions
| Interventions | CHX | Test (formulation) | Placebo |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingredients & concentration | Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.12% (w/v) (active ingredient) | Combination of leafs of | Distilled water |
| Dosage/ Regimen | 15 ml twice daily, rinse for 30 s, refrain from eating or drinking for 30 min | 15 ml twice daily, rinse for 30 s, refrain from eating or drinking for 30 min | 15 ml twice daily, rinse for 30 s, refrain from eating or drinking for 30 min |
| Duration | 24 h | 24 h | 24 h |
| Color | Light blue | Light yellow | Colorless |
| Preparation | Used commercial oral rinse (Oradex™) | Prepared in Balai Ungku Aziz Research Laboratory (BUARL), Faculty of Dentistry University of Malaya | Prepared in Balai Ungku Aziz Research Laboratory (BUARL), Faculty of Dentistry University of Malaya |
Fig. 1Consort 2010 flow diagram. The diagram graphically outlines the design and conduct of the clinical trial
Demographic data of participants
| Number | Total | |
|---|---|---|
| 14 | ||
| Age (years) | Mean ± SD | 30.79 ± 5.22 |
| Range | 25 – 39 | |
| Gender | Male | 13 |
| Female | 1 | |
| Ethnicity | Malay | 5 |
| Others | 9 |
Mean and standard deviation of PI after treatment with the different interventions at 24 h after tooth polishing
| Intervention | Number | Mean | SD | Kruskal-Wallis H test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test (formulation) | 14 | 0.931 | ±0.372 |
|
| CHX | 14 | 1.317 | ±0.344 | |
| Placebo | 14 | 1.440 | ±0.498 |
Comparison between mean PI of different interventions groups with achieved effect size and power
| Interventions groups comparison | Mann-Whitney | Achieved effect size | Achieved power at α error probability 0.05 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Test (formulation) versus placebo |
| 1.158 | 0.897 |
| Test (formulation) versus CHX |
| 1.077 | 0.856 |
| CHX versus placebo |
| 0.287 | 0.178 |
Fig. 2Mean PI of participants after treatment with different interventions at 24 h after tooth polishing. Statistical analysis of Mann Whitney U test showed (a) test (formulation) and placebo to be significant with p < 0.0167; (b) test (formulation) and CHX to be significant with p < 0.0167; (c) placebo and CHX to be non-significant with p >0.0167