-
Medicine Mar 2023At present, evidence of the role of oral hygiene in ICU-related pneumonia is rare. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of toothbrush-based oral care in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
At present, evidence of the role of oral hygiene in ICU-related pneumonia is rare. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of toothbrush-based oral care in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in patients with mechanical ventilation in the ICU.
METHODS
Ten databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating toothbrush-based oral care for preventing VAP in patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU. Quality assessment and data extraction were independently performed by 2 researchers. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs with 657 patients were included. Tooth brushing + 0.2%/0.12% chlorhexidine was associated with reduced incidence of VAP compared to chlorhexidine (OR = 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-0.91, P = .01) or tooth brushing + placebo (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25-0.86, P = .02) in patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU, but was similar to cotton wipe with 0.2% or 0.12% chlorhexidine (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.77-2.29, P = .31).
CONCLUSIONS
Tooth brushing combined with chlorhexidine mouthwash can prevent VAP in patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU. There is no advantage of tooth brushing combined with chlorhexidine mouthwash over cotton wipe with chlorhexidine mouthwash for preventing VAP in these patients.
Topics: Humans; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Chlorhexidine; Mouthwashes; Incidence; Intensive Care Units
PubMed: 37000078
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000033418 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jun 2007Most people with recurrent aphthous ulcers develop a few ulcers less than 1 cm in diameter, that heal after 5-14 days without scarring. The causes are unknown, but risks... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Most people with recurrent aphthous ulcers develop a few ulcers less than 1 cm in diameter, that heal after 5-14 days without scarring. The causes are unknown, but risks of recurrence may decrease if the person gives up smoking. Local physical trauma may trigger ulcers in susceptible people. In 10% of sufferers, lesions are more than 1 cm in diameter, and can cause scarring.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for recurrent aphthous ulcers? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to August 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 18 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: analgesics (local), carbenoxolone mouthwash, chlorhexidine (and similar agents), corticosteroids (topical), and tetracycline antibiotic mouthwash.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Carbenoxolone; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Mouthwashes; Recurrence; Stomatitis, Aphthous; Ulcer
PubMed: 19454082
DOI: No ID Found -
American Journal of Infection Control Feb 2022The use of nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs as a specimen collection method to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection is frequently perceived as uncomfortable by patients and requires...
BACKGROUND
The use of nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs as a specimen collection method to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection is frequently perceived as uncomfortable by patients and requires trained personnel. In this study, detection rate of SARS-CoV-2 in mouthwash samples and buccal swabs were compared in both children and adults.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
In patients admitted to hospital with confirmed COVID-19 within the previous 72 hours, NP and buccal swabs as well as mouthwash samples were collected. RT-qPCR was performed on all samples.
RESULTS
In total, 170 samples were collected from 155 patients (137 adults and 18 children). Approximately 91.7% of the collected NP swabs were positive in RT-PCR compared to 63.1% of mouthwash samples and 42.4% of buccal swabs. Compared to NP swabs, the sensitivity of using mouthwash was 96.3% and 65.4% for buccal swabs in NP swab samples with a CT value <25. With increasing CT values, sensitivity decreased in both mouthwash and buccal swabs. The virus load was highest during the first week of infection, with a continuous decline observed in all three collection methods over time.
DISCUSSION
Mouthwash presents an alternative collection method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in the case of unfeasible NP swab sampling. Buccal swabs should not be used due to their low sensitivity.
Topics: Adult; COVID-19; Child; Humans; Mouthwashes; Nasopharynx; SARS-CoV-2; Specimen Handling
PubMed: 34718065
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2021.10.019 -
British Dental Journal May 2020
Topics: Hydrogen Peroxide; Mouthwashes
PubMed: 32444705
DOI: 10.1038/s41415-020-1643-2 -
International Dental Journal Nov 2023This narrative literature review is the first in a 6-section supplement on the role of mouthwashes in oral care. This introduction briefly summarises current knowledge... (Review)
Review
This narrative literature review is the first in a 6-section supplement on the role of mouthwashes in oral care. This introduction briefly summarises current knowledge on antimicrobial mechanisms, relating to some of the most common over-the-counter mouthwash products available worldwide: chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide, cetylpyridinium chloride, povidone iodine, and essential oils. The aim of this first article is to describe how mouthwashes "kill" pathogenic microbes when used adjunctively and thus provide a basis for their widespread use to manage key oral diseases, namely caries, gingivitis, and periodontal disease. This article therefore sets the scene for subsequent, more detailed exploration of mouthwashes regarding their clinical effectiveness, impact on the oral microbiome, and possible effects on systemic health as well as natural alternatives and future directions. Other than the clinical effectiveness (for certain agents) of mouthwashes, on many topics there remains insufficient evidence for systematic review or formulation of robust national guidelines. The supplement, therefore, compiled by an international task team, is aimed at general dental practitioners across the globe, as an easy-to-read guide for helping to advise patients on mouthwash use based on the current best available evidence.
Topics: Humans; Mouthwashes; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Dentists; Professional Role; Chlorhexidine; Anti-Infective Agents; Gingivitis
PubMed: 37867063
DOI: 10.1016/j.identj.2023.08.009 -
Nitric Oxide : Biology and Chemistry Dec 2017Over-the-counter mouthwash comprises part of routine oral care for many; however, potential adverse effects of the long-term daily use have not been evaluated. Most...
AIMS
Over-the-counter mouthwash comprises part of routine oral care for many; however, potential adverse effects of the long-term daily use have not been evaluated. Most mouthwash contain antibacterial ingredients, which could impact oral microbes critical for nitric oxide formation, and in turn predispose to metabolic disorders including diabetes. Our aim was to evaluate longitudinally the association between baseline over-the-counter mouthwash use and development of pre-diabetes/diabetes over a 3-year follow-up.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The San Juan Overweight Adults Longitudinal Study (SOALS) recruited 1206 overweight/obese individuals, aged 40-65, and free of diabetes and major cardiovascular diseases; 945 with complete follow-up data were included in the analyses. We used Poisson regression models adjusting for baseline age, sex, smoking, physical activity, waist circumference, alcohol consumption, pre-hypertension/hypertension status; time between visits was included in the models as an offset.
RESULTS
Many participants (43%) used mouthwash at least once daily and 22% at least twice daily. Participants using mouthwash ≥ twice daily at baseline, had a significantly elevated risk of pre-diabetes/diabetes compared to less frequent users (multivariate IRR = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.21-1.99), or non-users of mouthwash (multivariate IRR = 1.49; 95% CI: 1.13-1.95). The effect estimates were similar after adding income, education, oral hygiene, oral conditions, sleep breathing disorders, diet (processed meat, fruit, and vegetable intake), medications, HOMA-IR, fasting glucose, 2hr post load glucose or CRP to the multivariate models. Both associations were also significant among never-smokers and obese individuals. Mouthwash use lower than twice daily showed no association, suggesting a threshold effect at twice or more daily.
CONCLUSIONS
Frequent regular use of over-the-counter mouthwash was associated with increased risk of developing pre-diabetes/diabetes in this population.
Topics: Adult; Diabetes Mellitus; Female; Humans; Male; Microbiota; Middle Aged; Mouth; Mouthwashes; Prediabetic State; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 28939409
DOI: 10.1016/j.niox.2017.09.004 -
Scientific Reports Feb 2024Periodontitis is known to be associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and gargling with mouthwash is known to reduce the incidence of periodontitis by inhibiting...
Periodontitis is known to be associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and gargling with mouthwash is known to reduce the incidence of periodontitis by inhibiting periodontal pathogens. However, the effects of mouthwash on oral and systemic conditions in patients with T2DM remain unknown. In this study, we investigated the effects of gargling with mouthwash on the number of red complex species, including Porphyromonas gingivalis, Treponema denticola, and Tannerella forsythia, and HbA1c levels in patients with T2DM. Patients were instructed to gargle with water for 6 months, followed by gargling with mouthwash containing chlorhexidine gluconate for the subsequent 6 months. At each clinic visit, saliva was collected and bacterial DNA was extracted to detect red complex species using the polymerase chain reaction technique. The HbA1c level was determined using a blood sample. The number of red complex species significantly decreased in younger or male patients who gargled with mouthwash. Furthermore, HbA1c levels significantly decreased in younger patients or patients with higher HbA1c levels who gargled with mouthwash. These results suggest that gargling with mouthwash reduces the number of red complex species and improves the hyperglycemic status in patients with T2DM, especially younger patients.
Topics: Humans; Male; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Mouthwashes; Glycated Hemoglobin; Glycemic Control; Porphyromonas gingivalis; Periodontitis
PubMed: 38307981
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-53213-x -
Canadian Journal of Dental Hygiene :... Oct 2021Research has revealed that periodontal diseases are caused by inflammation that results from a dysbiosis of the oral microbiome where oral bacteria multiply into larger... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Research has revealed that periodontal diseases are caused by inflammation that results from a dysbiosis of the oral microbiome where oral bacteria multiply into larger communities referred to as dental biofilm. To help control this overgrowth of bacteria, a variety of toothpastes, dentifrices, and mouthwashes have been developed. Although not as common in North American toothpastes, propolis as an active ingredient in dentifrices has begun to emerge, as laboratory studies have suggested it has anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, antimicrobial, and antidiabetic properties. The purpose of this scoping review was to explore the literature on the effectiveness of propolis in maintaining oral health.
METHODS
This review used the following criteria: studies involving healthy humans; propolis in the form of toothpaste, dentifrice, and mouthwash; fluoride, chlorohexidine, and placebo; plaque and gingival indices, improvement in oral hygiene, and inhibition of bacteria. Relevant research articles were selected from Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases using the search parameter "propolis[tw] AND (toothpaste*[tw] OR dentifrice*[tw] OR mouthwash*[tw])". Only original articles published after 2009 and written in the English language were included.
RESULTS
A total of 19 original papers met the criteria and showed varying levels of success achieved with the use of propolis. It was responsible for a significant lowering of specific plaque and gingival indices, inhibited the growth of bacteria, reduced oral flora diversity, and consistently improved periodontal condition, oral hygiene, and oral health.
CONCLUSION
Propolis may play a role in initiating, sustaining, and maintaining oral health as its desirable properties have the potential to improve various oral hygiene related indices.
Topics: Dental Plaque; Humans; Mouthwashes; Oral Health; Oral Hygiene; Propolis
PubMed: 34925517
DOI: No ID Found -
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 -
The Medical Journal of Malaysia Jul 2022Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is the most common head and neck cancer in Malaysia. The gold standard treatment of NPC is radiotherapy (RT), as NPC is a radiosensitive... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is the most common head and neck cancer in Malaysia. The gold standard treatment of NPC is radiotherapy (RT), as NPC is a radiosensitive tumour. Although RT is successful in treating NPC, patients cannot avoid the resulting RT complications. Oral mucositis is the most frequently encountered debilitating complication of RT and has no specific preventive treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 2.5% propolis mouthwash for preventing RT-induced mucositis in patients with NPC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study was a prospective, double-arm, randomised control trial with intervention. The patients were randomly divided into an experimental group receiving propolis mouthwash and a placebo group receiving normal saline mouthwash. All patients were instructed to rinse their mouths with 7mL mouthwash three times daily for six weeks. The severity of oral mucositis was then evaluated by the World Health Organization Oral Toxicity Scale at the second, fourth, and sixth weeks of the study.
RESULTS
In total, 17 patients completed the study: 10 patients used the propolis mouthwash and seven used the placebo mouthwash. The mean mucositis scores for the propolis mouthwash compared to the placebo at the second, fourth, and sixth weeks were 0.10 vs. 1.14, 0.50 vs. 2.00, and 1.20 vs. 2.86, respectively, and the differences between the two groups were statistically significant (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION
A 2.5% propolis mouthwash was both safe and effective for reducing the severity of oral mucositis following RT for NPC.
Topics: Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Mouthwashes; Mucositis; Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms; Propolis; Prospective Studies; Stomatitis
PubMed: 35902936
DOI: No ID Found