Yasemin Sezgin1, Betul Memis Ozgul2, Nilgun Ozlem Alptekin3. 1. Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Baskent University, Bahçelievler, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: yasemin_tocak@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Pediatric Dentistry Faculty of Dentistry, Baskent University, Bahçelievler, Ankara, Turkey. 3. Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Baskent University, Bahçelievler, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the plaque-inhibiting effects of oil pulling using 4- day plaque regrowth study model compared to 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) containing mouthrinse. DESIGN: The study was an observer-masked, randomized, cross-over design clinical trial, involving 29 volunteers to compare 0.2% CHX and oil pulling therapy in a 4- day plaque regrowth model. After the preparatory period, in which the subjects received professional prophylaxis, the subjects commenced rinsing with their allocated rinsed. On day 5 plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), stain index (SI), bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded from the subjects. Each participant underwent a 14- day wash out period and then used the other mouthrinse for four days. RESULTS:Oil pulling therapy presented similar inhibitory activity on plaque regrowth compared with CHX (PI = 1.67 ± 0.24, 1.61 ± 0.20, respectively) with less staining (SI = 0.21 ± 0.13, 0.47 ± 0.27, respectively). In addition, GI and BOP was similar in both groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Oil pulling with coconut oil seems to have similar plaque inhibition activity as CHX. In addition it caused less tooth staining than CHX. These findings suggest that oil pulling therapy may be an alternative to CHX rinse.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the plaque-inhibiting effects of oil pulling using 4- day plaque regrowth study model compared to 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) containing mouthrinse. DESIGN: The study was an observer-masked, randomized, cross-over design clinical trial, involving 29 volunteers to compare 0.2% CHX and oil pulling therapy in a 4- day plaque regrowth model. After the preparatory period, in which the subjects received professional prophylaxis, the subjects commenced rinsing with their allocated rinsed. On day 5 plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), stain index (SI), bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded from the subjects. Each participant underwent a 14- day wash out period and then used the other mouthrinse for four days. RESULTS:Oil pulling therapy presented similar inhibitory activity on plaque regrowth compared with CHX (PI = 1.67 ± 0.24, 1.61 ± 0.20, respectively) with less staining (SI = 0.21 ± 0.13, 0.47 ± 0.27, respectively). In addition, GI and BOP was similar in both groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION:Oil pulling with coconut oil seems to have similar plaque inhibition activity as CHX. In addition it caused less tooth staining than CHX. These findings suggest that oil pulling therapy may be an alternative to CHX rinse.