-
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Aug 2022Carbohydrates are an important fuel for optimal exercise performance during moderate- and high-intensity exercise; however, carbohydrate ingestion during high-intensity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Carbohydrates are an important fuel for optimal exercise performance during moderate- and high-intensity exercise; however, carbohydrate ingestion during high-intensity exercise may cause gastrointestinal upset. A carbohydrate oral rinse is an alternative method to improve exercise performance in moderate- to high-intensity exercise with a duration of 30-75 min. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively examine the isolated effect of maltodextrin-based rinsing on exercise performance.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this review was to establish the effect of a maltodextrin-based carbohydrate oral rinse on exercise performance across various modes of exercise. Furthermore, a secondary objective was to determine the effects of moderators [(1) participant characteristics; (2) oral rinse protocols; (3) exercise protocol (i.e. cycling, running etc.) and (4) fasting] on exercise performance while using a maltodextrin-based, carbohydrate oral rinse.
METHODS
Five databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, SPORTDiscus and Global Health) were systematically searched for articles up to March 2021 and screened using Covidence (a systematic review management tool). A random effects robust meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were performed using Stata Statistical Software: Release 16.
RESULTS
Thirty-five articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review; 34 of these articles were included in the meta-analysis. When using a conventional meta-analytic approach, overall, a carbohydrate oral rinse improved exercise performance in comparison with a placebo (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI 0.04, 0.27; p = 0.01). Furthermore, when implementing an adjusted, conservative, random effects meta-regression model using robust variance estimation, overall, compared with placebo, a carbohydrate oral rinse demonstrated evidence of improving exercise performance with a small effect size (SMD = 0.17, 95% CI - 0.01, 0.34; p = 0.051).
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that a maltodextrin-based carbohydrate oral rinse can improve exercise performance. When comparing the two meta-analytic approaches, although non-significant, the more robust, adjusted, random effects meta-regression model demonstrated some evidence of a maltodextrin-based carbohydrate oral rinse improving exercise performance overall.
Topics: Bicycling; Exercise; Humans; Mouthwashes; Polysaccharides
PubMed: 35239154
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-022-01658-3 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene Feb 2022The purpose of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the available evidence regarding the efficacy of curcumin mouthwashes on plaque and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the available evidence regarding the efficacy of curcumin mouthwashes on plaque and gingivitis.
METHODS
A comprehensive online search of multiple databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) was performed to identify all relevant studies published up to August 2020, using the following keywords: curcumin, turmeric, gingivitis, periodontal health, and plaque control. All clinical trials that compared the efficacy of curcumin mouthwash with chlorhexidine in controlling dental plaque and gingivitis were included. Data were analysed using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software. The risk of bias was evaluated by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane assessment tool.
RESULTS
Six randomized clinical trials (comprising 320 subjects) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Five studies showed a high risk of bias and only one study showed a low risk of bias. The pooled data of the six included studies revealed comparable efficacy of curcumin and chlorhexidine in reducing dental plaque (I = 91%; standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.27, 95% CI: -0.53, 1.07, p = 0. 51) and gingival inflammation (I = 40%; SMD: -0.13, 95% CI: -0.35, 0.09, p = 0.24), with no statistically significant differences between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
The results suggest that curcumin mouthwashes have promising anti-plaque and anti-gingivitis properties. Further clinical trials with adequate sample sizes and standardized methodologies are required to discern the efficacy of curcumin mouthwash in reducing plaque and gingivitis.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chlorhexidine; Curcumin; Dental Plaque; Dental Plaque Index; Gingivitis; Humans; Mouthwashes
PubMed: 34013606
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12518 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Oct 2023COVID-19 has been a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) for a lengthy period of time. The novel coronavirus is primarily spread via aerosols at a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 has been a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) for a lengthy period of time. The novel coronavirus is primarily spread via aerosols at a short distance, with infected individuals releasing large amounts of aerosols when speaking and coughing. However, there is an open question regarding whether mouthwash could effectively reduce virus transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic and support the prevention of infection among medical workers.
METHODS
Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were systematically searched from the inception of each database to January 12, 2023 for currently available randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the effect of mouthwash on novel coronavirus load in the oral cavity in COVID-19 patients. The treatment group received mouthwash for rinsing the mouth, while the control group received a placebo or distilled water for COVID-19 patients. The primary outcomes were CT value and viral load. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using a random-effects model. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to minimize the bias and the impact of heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs were included. Seven studies reported the intervention effect of mouthwash on the CT value of novel coronavirus. The analysis results showed that the mouthwash group had a positive impact on the CT value of novel coronavirus [ SMD = 0.35, 95% CI (0.21, 0.50)] compared with the control group. In addition, subgroup analysis showed a significant positive effect of mouthwash on CT values in the treatment group compared with the control group, with chlorhexidine (CHX) [SMD = 0.33, 95% CI (0.10, 0.56)], povidone-iodine (PVP-I) [SMD = 0.61, 95% CI (0.23, 0.99)], or hydrogen peroxide (HP) [SMD = 1.04, 95% CI (0.30, 1.78)] as an ingredient of the mouthwash. Six studies reported the intervention effect of mouthwash on the viral load, 263 cases in the treatment group and 164 cases in the control group. The analysis results showed that there was no statistical difference between the mouthwash group and the control group in the viral load of novel coronavirus [SMD = -0.06, 95% CI (-0.18, 0.05)]. In the subgroup analysis by measurement time, there were statistically significant differences between the mouthwash and control groups for CT values [SMD = 0.52, 95% CI (0.31, 0.72)] and viral load [SMD = - 0.32, 95% CI (- 0.56, - 0.07)] within 30 min of gargling.
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, mouthwash has some efficacy in reducing the viral load of novel coronavirus, especially within 30 min after rinsing the mouth. Mouthwash containing CHX, PVP-I and HP all had significant positive effects on CT values, and PVP-I-containing mouthwash may be a promising option to control novel coronavirus infections and relieve virus-related symptoms. However, studies on the dose and frequency of use of mouthwash for infection control are still lacking, which may limit the clinical application of mouthwash.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Protocol registration: The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023401961).
Topics: Humans; Mouthwashes; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Povidone-Iodine; Viral Load; Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets; Chlorhexidine; Hydrogen Peroxide
PubMed: 37821800
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08669-z -
JAMA Network Open Dec 2022Chlorhexidine mouthwash enhances treatment effects of conventional periodontal treatment, but data on chlorhexidine as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analyses... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Chlorhexidine mouthwash enhances treatment effects of conventional periodontal treatment, but data on chlorhexidine as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analyses assessing the treatment of maternal periodontitis in association with birth outcomes are lacking.
OBJECTIVE
To assess possible heterogeneity by chlorhexidine use in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of periodontal treatment (ie, scaling and root planing [SRP]) vs no treatment on birth outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database), US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched through March 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
RCTs were included if they were conducted among pregnant individuals with periodontitis, used interventions consisting of SRP vs no periodontal treatment, and assessed birth outcomes.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were abstracted with consensus of 2 reviewers using Rayyan and assessed for bias with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool before random effects subgroup meta-analyses. Analyses were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Outcomes of interest were preterm birth (ie, <37 weeks' gestation) and low birth weight (ie, <2500 g).
RESULTS
There were 12 studies with a total of 5735 participants evaluating preterm birth. Control group participants did not receive any treatment or use chlorhexidine during pregnancy. All intervention group participants received SRP; in 5 of these studies (with 2570 participants), pregnant participants in the treatment group either received chlorhexidine mouthwash or advice to use it, but participants in the remaining 7 studies (with 3183 participants) did not. There were 8 studies with a total of 3510 participants evaluating low birth weight, including 3 studies with SRP plus chlorhexidine (with 594 participants) and 6 studies with SRP only (with 2916 participants). The SRP plus chlorhexidine groups had lower risk of preterm birth (relative risk [RR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.34-0.93) and low birth weight (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.32-0.68) but not the SRP-only groups (preterm birth: RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29; low birth weight: RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.62-1.08).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings suggest that treating maternal periodontitis with chlorhexidine mouthwash plus SRP was associated with reduced risk of preterm and low birth weight. Well-conducted RCTs are needed to test this hypothesis.
Topics: United States; Infant, Newborn; Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Chlorhexidine; Mouthwashes; Premature Birth; Root Planing; Periodontitis
PubMed: 36534397
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.47632 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Jun 2020Taste disorder is a frequent drug-induced or disease-related oral trouble. Various pharmacological, surgical, or physical treatments have previously been proposed for...
BACKGROUND
Taste disorder is a frequent drug-induced or disease-related oral trouble. Various pharmacological, surgical, or physical treatments have previously been proposed for taste function recovery.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the present systematic review was to assess the effects of palliative and curative interventions on taste recovery in light of recent literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, a search of the literature published up to June 2019 was conducted using MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, and The US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (PROSPERO registration reference: CRD 42019139315). The methodological quality of the included trials was rated with the "Delphi list For Quality Assessment of Randomized Clinical Trials" and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
RESULTS
From the 1842 titles first identified, 28 articles met the inclusion criteria. Interventions included zinc (aspartate, sulfate, gluconate, acetate, picolinate, and Polaprezinc®), esomeprazole, L-thyroxin, bethanechol, oral glutamine, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, alpha-lipoic acid, Ginkgo biloba, artificial saliva, pilocarpine, local anesthesia, and improved oral hygiene. The quality of evidence ranged from poor to high.
CONCLUSION
Improving oral hygiene may promote taste ability. Zinc may prevent and alleviate taste disorder in patients undergoing head and neck radiotherapy.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
The systematic review provided evidence about the clinical efficacy of oral procedures, zinc supplementation, and palliative cares in dysgeusic patients. Further research is needed to find effective treatments with low adverse effects.
Topics: Humans; Oral Hygiene; Saliva, Artificial; Taste Disorders; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32385655
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03299-0 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023Central venous catheters (CVC) are associated with potentially dangerous complications such as thromboses, pericardial effusions, extravasation, and infections in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Central venous catheters (CVC) are associated with potentially dangerous complications such as thromboses, pericardial effusions, extravasation, and infections in neonates. Indwelling catheters are amongst the main risk factors for nosocomial infections. The use of skin antiseptics during the preparation for central catheter insertion may prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) and central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI). However, it is still not clear which antiseptic solution is the best to prevent infection with minimal side effects.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of different antiseptic solutions in preventing CRBSI and other related outcomes in neonates with CVC.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries up to 22 April 2022. We checked reference lists of included trials and systematic reviews that related to the intervention or population examined in this Cochrane Review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion in this review if they were performed in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and were comparing any antiseptic solution (single or in combination) against any other type of antiseptic solution or no antiseptic solution or placebo in preparation for central catheter insertion. We excluded cross-over trials and quasi-RCTs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methods from Cochrane Neonatal. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three trials that had two different comparisons: 2% chlorhexidine in 70% isopropyl alcohol (CHG-IPA) versus 10% povidone-iodine (PI) (two trials); and CHG-IPA versus 2% chlorhexidine in aqueous solution (CHG-A) (one trial). A total of 466 neonates from level III NICUs were evaluated. All included trials were at high risk of bias. The certainty of the evidence for the primary and some important secondary outcomes ranged from very low to moderate. There were no included trials that compared antiseptic skin solutions with no antiseptic solution or placebo. CHG-IPA versus 10% PI Compared to PI, CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in CRBSI (risk ratio (RR) 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 3.25; risk difference (RD) 0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.06; 352 infants, 2 trials, low-certainty evidence) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.68; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.06; 304 infants, 1 trial, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of CHG-IPA on CLABSI (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.08; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.11; 48 infants, 1 trial; very low-certainty evidence) and chemical burns (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.24 to 4.48; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 352 infants, 2 trials, very low-certainty evidence), compared to PI. Based on a single trial, infants receiving CHG-IPA appeared less likely to develop thyroid dysfunction compared to PI (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.85; RD -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 17, 95% CI 10 to 50; 304 infants). Neither of the two included trials assessed the outcome of premature central line removal or the proportion of infants or catheters with exit-site infection. CHG-IPA versus CHG-A The evidence suggests CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in the rate of proven CRBSI when applied on the skin of neonates prior to central line insertion (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.87; RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.13; 106 infants, 1 trial, low-certainty evidence) and CLABSI (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.84; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.15; 106 infants, 1 trial, low-certainty evidence), compared to CHG-A. Compared to CHG-A, CHG-IPA probably results in little to no difference in premature catheter removal (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.19; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.13; 106 infants, 1 trial, moderate-certainty evidence) and chemical burns (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.03; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.18; 114 infants, 1 trial, moderate-certainty evidence). No trial assessed the outcome of all-cause mortality and the proportion of infants or catheters with exit-site infection.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on current evidence, compared to PI, CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in CRBSI and mortality. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of CHG-IPA on CLABSI and chemical burns. One trial showed a statistically significant increase in thyroid dysfunction with the use of PI compared to CHG-IPA. The evidence suggests CHG-IPA may result in little to no difference in the rate of proven CRBSI and CLABSI when applied on the skin of neonates prior to central line insertion. Compared to CHG-A, CHG-IPA probably results in little to no difference in chemical burns and premature catheter removal. Further trials that compare different antiseptic solutions are required, especially in low- and middle-income countries, before stronger conclusions can be made.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Burns, Chemical; Central Venous Catheters; Chlorhexidine; Sepsis
PubMed: 37142550
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013841.pub2 -
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Aug 2021Octenidine dihydrochloride is an antimicrobial cationic surfactant compound. We conducted a systematic review to determine the efficacy of octenidine-based mouthwash on...
OBJECTIVE
Octenidine dihydrochloride is an antimicrobial cationic surfactant compound. We conducted a systematic review to determine the efficacy of octenidine-based mouthwash on plaque formation, gingivitis, and oral microbial growth in subjects with or without periodontal disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies. The review was conducted per PRISMA guidelines. Only randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing octenidine with placebo or other mouthwashes in healthy subjects with or without periodontal disease, were considered for this review. The endpoints included percentage reduction in plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), absolute reduction in the mean number of colony-forming units (CFU/ml [log ]) and adverse effects (AEs; tooth staining/mucosal tolerance).
RESULTS
Ten randomized controlled and six observational studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Twice or thrice daily rinsing with 0.1% octenidine for 30-60 s produced significant reduction in plaque, gingivitis and oral microbial growth. Compared to control mouthwash or baseline, 0.1% octenidine inhibited plaque formation by ~38.7%-92.9%, which was either equal or greater than that of chlorhexidine gluconate. 0.1% octenidine reduced gingivitis by ~36.4%-68.37% versus control mouthwash or baseline and microbial growth by 0.37-5.3 colony-forming units (vs. chlorhexidine: 0.4-4.23 colony-forming units). Additional benefits of 0.1% octenidine were significant reduction in the number of bleeding sites, papilla bleeding index, sulcus bleeding index, and gingival fluid flow.
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of this study, there exists moderate evidence that 0.1% OCT was found to be an effective antiplaque agent. Octenidine inhibited plaque formation upto 93% and gingivitis upto 68% versus placebo and was either superior or comparable to chlorhexidine. Octenidine was well-tolerated and safe and can be an effective alternative to CHX and other contemporary mouthwashes.
Topics: Chlorhexidine; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Humans; Imines; Mouthwashes; Periodontal Diseases; Pyridines
PubMed: 34227746
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.386 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Pneumonia in residents of nursing homes can be termed nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP). NHAP is one of the most common infections identified in nursing home... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pneumonia in residents of nursing homes can be termed nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP). NHAP is one of the most common infections identified in nursing home residents and has the highest mortality of any infection in this population. NHAP is associated with poor oral hygiene and may be caused by aspiration of oropharyngeal flora into the lung. Oral care measures to remove or disrupt oral plaque might reduce the risk of NHAP. This is the first update of a review published in 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To assess effects of oral care measures for preventing nursing home-acquired pneumonia in residents of nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.
SEARCH METHODS
An information specialist searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, one other database and three trials registers up to 12 May 2022. We also used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of oral care measures (brushing, swabbing, denture cleaning mouthrinse, or combination) in residents of any age in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently assessed search results, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information. We pooled data from studies with similar interventions and outcomes. We reported risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, and hazard ratios (HRs) or incidence rate ratio (IRR) for time-to-event outcomes, using random-effects models.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six RCTs (6244 participants), all of which were at high risk of bias. Three studies were carried out in Japan, two in the USA, and one in France. The studies evaluated one comparison: professional oral care versus usual oral care. We did not include the results from one study (834 participants) because it had been stopped at interim analysis. Consistent results from five studies, with 5018 participants, provided insufficient evidence of a difference between professional oral care and usual (simple, self-administered) oral care in the incidence of pneumonia. Three studies reported HRs, one reported IRRs, and one reported RRs. Due to the variation in study design and follow-up duration, we decided not to pool the data. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for this outcome by two levels to low: one level for study limitations (high risk of performance bias), and one level for imprecision. There was low-certainty evidence from meta-analysis of two individually randomised studies that professional oral care may reduce the risk of pneumonia-associated mortality compared with usual oral care at 24 months' follow-up (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.76, 454 participants). Another study (2513 participants) reported insufficient evidence of a difference for this outcome at 18 months' follow-up. Three studies measured all-cause mortality and identified insufficient evidence of a difference between professional and usual oral care at 12 to 30 months' follow-up. Only one study (834 participants) measured the adverse effects of the interventions. The study identified no serious events and 64 non-serious events, the most common of which were oral cavity disturbances (not defined) and dental staining. No studies evaluated oral care versus no oral care.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although low-certainty evidence suggests that professional oral care may reduce mortality compared to usual care when measured at 24 months, the effect of professional oral care on preventing NHAP remains largely unclear. Low-certainty evidence was inconclusive about the effects of this intervention on incidence and number of first episodes of NHAP. Due to differences in study design, effect measures, follow-up duration, and composition of the interventions, we cannot determine the optimal oral care protocol from current evidence. Future trials will require larger samples, robust methods that ensure low risk of bias, and more practicable interventions for nursing home residents.
Topics: Humans; Mouthwashes; Nursing Homes; Pneumonia; Toothbrushing; Oral Hygiene; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36383760
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012416.pub3 -
Integrative Cancer Therapies 2023Despite significant advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, many people across the world still suffer from this chronic disease and its complications.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Despite significant advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, many people across the world still suffer from this chronic disease and its complications. Chamomile as an herbal medicine has gained an increasing attention for relieving cancer complications. This study aimed to integrate and synthesize current international evidence regarding the effect of chamomile on cancer complications.
METHODS
A systematic review was undertaken. Five online databases including Web of Science, PubMed [including MEDLINE], Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase were searched and articles published from inception to January 2023 were retrieved. All clinical trials and similar interventional studies on human subjects examining the effects of chamomile on cancer complications were included in the review and research synthesis. Relevant data were extracted from eligible studies after quality appraisals using proper methodological tools. The review results were presented narratively given that meta-analysis was impossible.
RESULTS
A total of 2240 studies were retrieved during the search process, but 18 articles were selected. The total sample size was 1099 patients with cancer of which 622 participants were female. Fifteen studies used an RCT design. Various forms of chamomile were used such as mouthwash, topical material, tea, capsule, syrup and aromatherapy massage. Chamomile effectively reduced oral mucositis, skin complications, depression, and vomiting and also improved appetite and quality of life among cancer patients.
CONCLUSION
The use of chamomile as a non-pharmacologic and safe method can be helpful for mitigating cancer complications in patients with cancer. Therefore, it can be incorporated into routine care along with other therapeutic measures to reduce patients' suffering related to cancer.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER (PROSPERO)
CRD42022307887.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Chamomile; Massage; Neoplasms; Plant Extracts; Quality of Life; Stomatitis
PubMed: 37052390
DOI: 10.1177/15347354231164600 -
Molecular Oral Microbiology Jun 2023COVID-19 is a transmissible respiratory and multisystem disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Viral transmission occurs mainly... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
COVID-19 is a transmissible respiratory and multisystem disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Viral transmission occurs mainly through the spread of salivary droplets or aerosol from an infected subject. Studies suggest that salivary viral load is correlated with disease severity and probability of transmission. Cetylpyridinium chloride mouthwash has been found to be effective in reducing salivary viral load. The aim of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials is to evaluate the efficacy of the mouthwash ingredient cetylpyridinium chloride on salivary viral load in SARS-CoV-2 infection.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials comparing cetylpyridinium chloride mouthwash with placebo and other mouthwash ingredients in SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals were identified and evaluated.
RESULTS
Six studies with a total of 301 patients that met the inclusion criteria were included. The studies reported the efficacy of cetylpyridinium chloride mouthwashes in reduction on SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load compared to placebo and other mouthwash ingredients.
CONCLUSION
Mouthwashes containing cetylpyridinium chloride are effective against salivary viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in vivo. There is also the possibility that the use of mouthwash containing cetylpyridinium chloride in SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects could reduce transmissibility and severity of COVID-19.
Topics: Humans; Cetylpyridinium; Mouthwashes; SARS-CoV-2; Chlorides; Dental Plaque; COVID-19; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36808889
DOI: 10.1111/omi.12408