-
Dental Clinics of North America Oct 2015Also note that structured abstracts are not allowed per journal style: What is the effect of a mouthwash containing various active chemical ingredients on plaque control... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Also note that structured abstracts are not allowed per journal style: What is the effect of a mouthwash containing various active chemical ingredients on plaque control and managing gingivitis in adults based on evidence gathered from existing systematic reviews? The summarized evidence suggests that mouthwashes containing chlorhexidine(CHX) and essential oils (EO) had a large effect supported by a strong body of evidence. Also there was strong evidence for a moderate effect of cetylpyridinium chloride(CPC). Evidence suggests that a CHX mouthwash is the first choice, the most reliable alternative is EO. No difference between CHX and EO with respect to gingivitis was observed.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Humans; Mouthwashes; Oral Health
PubMed: 26427569
DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2015.06.002 -
International Dental Journal Nov 2023This narrative review describes the oral microbiome, and its role in oral health and disease, before considering the impact of commonly used over-the-counter (OTC)... (Review)
Review
This narrative review describes the oral microbiome, and its role in oral health and disease, before considering the impact of commonly used over-the-counter (OTC) mouthwashes on oral bacteria, viruses, bacteriophages, and fungi that make up these microbial communities in different niches of the mouth. Whilst certain mouthwashes have proven antimicrobial actions and clinical effectiveness supported by robust evidence, this review reports more recent metagenomics evidence, suggesting that mouthwashes such as chlorhexidine may cause "dysbiosis," whereby certain species of bacteria are killed, leaving others, sometimes unwanted, to predominate. There is little known about the effects of mouthwashes on fungi and viruses in the context of the oral microbiome (virome) in vivo, despite evidence that they "kill" certain viral pathogens ex vivo. Evidence for mouthwashes, much like antibiotics, is also emerging with regards to antimicrobial resistance, and this should further be considered in the context of their widespread use by clinicians and patients. Therefore, considering the potential of currently available OTC mouthwashes to alter the oral microbiome, this article finally proposes that the ideal mouthwash, whilst combatting oral disease, should "balance" antimicrobial communities, especially those associated with health. Which antimicrobial mouthwash best fits this ideal remains uncertain.
Topics: Humans; Mouthwashes; Chlorhexidine; Mouth; Anti-Infective Agents; Bacteria; Microbiota
PubMed: 37867065
DOI: 10.1016/j.identj.2023.08.010 -
Journal of Clinical Orthodontics : JCO Aug 2020
Topics: Analgesics; Mouthwashes
PubMed: 32966265
DOI: No ID Found -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Sep 2021Painful oral mucositis or trismus, caused by cancer therapy, reduces patients' willingness to maintain basic oral hygiene and eventually results in a poor oral health... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Painful oral mucositis or trismus, caused by cancer therapy, reduces patients' willingness to maintain basic oral hygiene and eventually results in a poor oral health status. Using mouth rinses and cleaning the tongue are popular ways to improve the oral health status.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of green tea mouthwash for improving the oral health status in oral cancer patients undergoing cancer treatment.
DESIGN
This was a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial.
SETTINGS
Patients were recruited from a major regional teaching hospital that provides specialist cancer care services in Chia-Yi, Taiwan, from July 2018 to June 2020.
PARTICIPANTS
A total of 63 patients met the following criteria: > 20 years old; newly diagnosed with oral cancer by a physician; treated with oral surgery within one month prior; and completion of follow-up, with or without chemotherapy or radiation therapy. The exclusion criteria were mental illness; an acute and severe illness; complete edentulism; and inability to open the mouth more than 1 cm.
METHODS
Patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups: the mouthwash with green tea (intervention) group or the tap water (control) group. After each teeth-brushing procedure, those in the intervention group rinsed the mouth with 100 ml of a green tea solution for 60 seconds, and those in the control group rinsed the mouth with 100 ml of tap water for 60 seconds. The primary outcome was the oral health status, which was evaluated according to the Oral Assessment Guide and measured at baseline and at every monthly outpatient follow-up until six months by the same nurse.
RESULTS
There were 31 subjects in the intervention group and 30 subjects in the control group in the final analysis. The results of t-test showed that compared with baseline, the improvement in the oral health status in the intervention group was significantly better than that in the control group at 4 months after the intervention began. At 4 to 6 months after the intervention began, the oral health status score in the intervention group significantly decreased, by 1.71, 2.97 and 2.93 points, respectively, compared with that in the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
The oral health status can be improved and maintained for a long time with the continuous use of green tea mouthwash. Green tea mouthwash is a simple, natural, effective and safe intervention that should be recognized as a nonpharmacological treatment option for protecting the oral mucosa.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04615780.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Mouth Neoplasms; Mouthwashes; Oral Health; Prospective Studies; Single-Blind Method; Tea; Young Adult
PubMed: 34186380
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.103985 -
British Dental Journal May 2020
Topics: Hydrogen Peroxide; Mouthwashes
PubMed: 32444705
DOI: 10.1038/s41415-020-1643-2 -
Sexual Health Sep 2019The gonorrhoea rate among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men (MSM) has been increasing rapidly in many Western countries. Furthermore, gonorrhoea is becoming... (Review)
Review
The gonorrhoea rate among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men (MSM) has been increasing rapidly in many Western countries. Furthermore, gonorrhoea is becoming increasingly resistant to antibiotics and only limited options remain for treatment. Recent evidence suggests that the oropharynx may play an important role in gonorrhoea transmission. It is hypothesised that reducing the prevalence of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea will also reduce the population incidence of gonorrhoea. Mouthwash has been proposed as a novel non-antibiotic intervention to prevent oropharyngeal gonorrhoea; hence, reducing the probability of antibiotic resistance developing. However, its efficacy is yet to be confirmed by a randomised controlled trial - the findings of which will be available in 2019. If the trial shows mouthwash is effective in preventing gonorrhoea, this finding could potentially be translated into a public health campaign to increase the mouthwash use in the MSM population. This article summarises the current evidence of the effectiveness of mouthwash against gonorrhoea and discusses the potential literature gaps before implementing the mouthwash intervention at a population level.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Gonorrhea; Health Promotion; Humans; Mouthwashes; Neisseria gonorrhoeae; Oropharynx
PubMed: 31099331
DOI: 10.1071/SH18237 -
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 -
International Dental Journal Jun 2022The aim of this work was to review the current uses of chlorhexidine (CHX) in dentistry based on its mechanism of action, whilst highlighting the most effective... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this work was to review the current uses of chlorhexidine (CHX) in dentistry based on its mechanism of action, whilst highlighting the most effective protocols that render the highest clinical efficacy whilst limiting adverse drug reactions.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using the key words chlorhexidine, mechanism of action, adverse effects, and dentistry using databases in the University of Toronto library system. The titles and abstracts were read, and relevant articles were selected.
RESULTS
A total of 1100 publications were identified, 100 were investigated, and 67 of them were used. Out of the 67 selected articles, 12 were reviews on CHX; 5 articles focussed on CHX gels; 13 focussed on CHX mouthwashes; 8 focussed on CHX products; 13 discussed adverse effects associated with CHX; 13 focussed on periodontal pathology and treatment; 6 focussed on implant periodontal and dental surgeries; 7 evaluated effects on caries; 6 looked at the mechanisms of action; and 12 focussed on the antibacterial and antimicrobial impact on the oral biome. There were multiple areas of overlap amongst the articles, and results showed that CHX provides different uses, but mainly as an adjunct to various treatments. Mouthwash was the most superior medium when used in short time spans when mechanical prophylaxis was not possible for the prevention of gingivitis and maintenance of oral hygiene. CHX products are often used in periodontics, post-oral surgical procedures, and as a prophylaxis for multiple invasive procedures with minimal adverse effects. Tooth staining was the most negative adverse effect reported by patients.
CONCLUSIONS
CHX's antimicrobial properties make it an ideal prophylactic when mechanical debridement is not possible. CHX mouthwash appears to be more effective compared to gels. Concentrations of 0.12% to 0.2% are recommended; any mouthwash with concentrations above 0.2% will unnecessarily increase the unwanted side effects. CHX is useful amongst various areas of dentistry including oral surgery, periodontics, and even general dentistry. For long-term treatments, especially in periodontitis patients (stage I-III) undergoing nonsurgical treatments, CHX chips are recommended. CHX chips are also recommended as an adjunct to implant debridement in patients with peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis over CHX mouthwash and gels.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chlorhexidine; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Gels; Humans; Mouthwashes; Oral Hygiene
PubMed: 35287956
DOI: 10.1016/j.identj.2022.01.005 -
Quintessence International (Berlin,... 2017To evaluate the effectiveness of chlorhexidine mouthwashes on the reduction of cariogenic bacteria on patients with moderate to high risk for dental caries. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness of chlorhexidine mouthwashes on the reduction of cariogenic bacteria on patients with moderate to high risk for dental caries.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review of the literature was performed using Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. The search was limited to articles in English, Spanish, and Portuguese, published until January 2017. The research question was formulated following the PICO strategy. The risk of bias was evaluated using the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
CONCLUSION
All the authors found statistically significant differences in Streptococcus mutans levels during and after the use of a chlorhexidine mouthwash. Although the results are suggestive, there is a clear need for the development of new studies with higher quality and with longer follow-ups, in order to assess whether the results translate into less development of dental caries and, consequently, whether or not these products should be incorporated into prevention protocols.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chlorhexidine; Dental Caries; Humans; Mouthwashes
PubMed: 28555200
DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a38353 -
Oral Diseases Jan 2014
Meta-Analysis Review
Topics: Dental Caries; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Humans; Mouth Neoplasms; Mouthwashes; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24341773
DOI: 10.1111/odi.12187