-
BMJ Open Sep 2020To examine the rinsing and gargling mouthwash practices among frequent mouthwash users to determine if there are differences in use between gender, sexual orientation...
OBJECTIVE
To examine the rinsing and gargling mouthwash practices among frequent mouthwash users to determine if there are differences in use between gender, sexual orientation and sex work status.
DESIGN
Cross-sectional study.
SETTING
Data obtained from patients attending a sexual health centre located in Melbourne, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS
200 frequent mouthwash users (four or more times per week), 50 for each of the following patient groups: men who have sex with men (MSM), female sex workers (FSW), females who are not sex workers and men who have sex with women only (MSW). Participants were observed and audio recorded using mouthwash.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES
Descriptive analyses were conducted to calculate the median age, time rinsing and gargling, amount of mouthwash used and proportion of participants who rinsed, gargled or both, as determined from the audio files. Kruskal-Wallis H test and χ test were used to examine differences between the patient groups.
RESULTS
Median age was 28 years (IQR: 24-33). During the study, most (n=127; 63.5%) rinsed and gargled, but 70 (35.0%) rinsed only and three (1.5%) gargled only. Median time rinsing was 13.5 s (IQR: 8.5-22.0 s), gargling was 4.0 s (IQR: 2.5-6.0 s) and the median total duration was 17.0 s (IQR: 11.5-25.8 s). Median duration of mouthwash did not differ significantly between the groups (females not sex workers: 18.8 s (IQR: 12.5-24.5 s); FSW: 14.0 s (9.0-22.0 s); MSM: 22.3 s (13.0-26.5 s); MSW: 15.8 s (12.0-25.0 s); p=0.070) but males used mouthwash longer than females (median 20.3 s compared with 15.5 s; p=0.034). The median volume of mouthwash used was 20 mL (IQR: 15-27 mL). And most (n=198; 99.0%) did not dilute mouthwash with water.
CONCLUSION
Over a quarter of frequent users do not gargle mouthwash at all (35%) and used it for a substantially shorter period of time than it was used in the randomised trial (1 min) where it was shown to be effective at inhibiting growth. Our findings suggest that many frequent mouthwash users do not follow the manufacturer instructions for using mouthwash and may not use mouthwash in a way that was shown to reduce the growth of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea.
Topics: Adult; Australia; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Gonorrhea; Homosexuality, Male; Humans; Male; Mouthwashes; Pharyngeal Diseases; Sex Workers; Sexual and Gender Minorities
PubMed: 32994261
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040754 -
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 -
BMC Oral Health Dec 2022Pilocarpine is an accepted treatment for xerostomia, but limited research has been conducted on the oral, topical form. The present study aimed to compare the effects of... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
AIMS & BACKGROUND
Pilocarpine is an accepted treatment for xerostomia, but limited research has been conducted on the oral, topical form. The present study aimed to compare the effects of 1 and 2% pilocarpine mouthwash on xerostomic participants.
METHODS
In this double-blind clinical trial study, 48 subjects with xerostomia were randomly divided into three groups to measure the effects of 1 and 2% pilocarpine and placebo mouthwashes on saliva levels. The amount of saliva in the 1st and 14th days was measured at 0, 45, 60, and 75 mins, while participants used their mouthwash three times a day for 14 days. On the 1st and 14th days, they filled out the information forms on xerostomia and the medicine's side effects before and after the intervention.
RESULTS
On the 1st day, the mean salivary flow at 45, 60, and 75 mins in the 2 and 1% pilocarpine mouthwash were significantly higher than in the placebo mouthwash group (p < 0.05). On the 14th day, the mean salivary flow time at 45 mins in the 2% pilocarpine mouthwash group was significantly higher than in the placebo mouthwash group (p = 0.007). Furthermore, the mean salivary flow at 60 and 75 mins in the 2% (p < 0.001) and 1% pilocarpine mouthwash (p = 0.028) was significantly higher than in the placebo group. Moreover, the salivary flow in the 2% pilocarpine mouthwash group was significantly higher than the 1% pilocarpine mouthwash (p < 0.05) during these two times. No side effects were observed in any of the subjects.
CONCLUSIONS
The study showed that 5 ml of 2 and 1% pilocarpine mouthwash for 2 weeks increased salivary flow in xerostomic participants compared to placebo without any side effects.
Topics: Humans; Pilocarpine; Mouthwashes; Xerostomia; Saliva
PubMed: 36457091
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02576-6 -
The Journal of Evidence-based Dental... Dec 2022This clinical trial aimed to evaluate the use of mouthwash and dentifrice containing an antimicrobial phthalocyanine derivative (APD) to reduce the clinical symptoms in... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
USE OF MOUTHWASH AND DENTIFRICE CONTAINING AN ANTIMICROBIAL PHTHALOCYANINE DERIVATIVE FOR THE REDUCTION OF CLINICAL SYMPTOMS OF COVID-19: A RANDOMIZED TRIPLE-BLIND CLINICAL TRIAL.
PURPOSE
This clinical trial aimed to evaluate the use of mouthwash and dentifrice containing an antimicrobial phthalocyanine derivative (APD) to reduce the clinical symptoms in patients with COVID-19.
METHODS
This randomized, triple-blind clinical trial enrolled 134 patients aged 18 years or older who underwent COVID-19 testing through the use of nasopharyngeal swab RT-qPCR in a reference center for the diagnosis of COVID-19, had no clinical contraindications to mouthwash and gargle, and had access to cell phones with communication applications. According to the use of a mouthwash and dentifrice containing antimicrobial phthalocyanine derivatives (APD), patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the APD or non-APD (control) group. All participants were instructed to floss twice a day, brush teeth for 2 minutes 3 times a day, and gargle/rinse (5 mL) for 1 min/3 times a day for 7 days. An online questionnaire was sent to collect data on the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 3 times: T0 (baseline before using the oral hygiene products), T3 (3 days after), and T7 (7 days after). The investigators, patients, and outcome assessors were blinded to group assignment. The Mann-Whitney, Chi-Square, Fisher's exact, and Cochran's tests were used according to the nature of the variables studied, with the level of significance set at P < .05.
RESULTS
No statistically significant difference was found in the prevalence of symptoms between groups at baseline. A statistically significant reduction in clinical symptoms was found in the control group (fatigue, shortness of breath, hoarse voice, sore throat, nasal congestion, and chest pain) and APD group (cough, fatigue, shortness of breath, hyposmia/anosmia, dysgeusia, hoarse voice, sore throat, nasal congestion, chest pain, diarrhea, and irritability/confusion) during the follow-up period. There were statistically significant differences, with a higher prevalence of symptoms in the control group at T3 and T7. Dysgeusia, sore throat, and irritability/confusion were less prevalent in the APD group at T3, and shortness of breath, hyposmia/anosmia, dysgeusia, hoarse voice, sore throat, diarrhea, and irritability/confusion were more prevalent in the control group at T7.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on this methodology, the results demonstrated that the regular use of mouthwash and dentifrice-containing APD had a positive impact on the clinical symptoms, as reported by patients with COVID-19.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; Mouthwashes; Anti-Infective Agents; Treatment Outcome; Chest Pain; Double-Blind Method
PubMed: 36494114
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2022.101777 -
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 -
BioMed Research International 2022Herbal and chemical products are used for oral care and biofilm treatment and also have been reported to be controversial in the massive trials conducted in this regard.... (Review)
Review
Herbal and chemical products are used for oral care and biofilm treatment and also have been reported to be controversial in the massive trials conducted in this regard. The present review is aimed at evaluating the potential of relevant herbal and chemical products and comparing their outcomes to conventional oral care products and summarizing the current state of evidence of the antibiofilm properties of different products by evaluating studies from the past eleven years. Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX), essential oils (EOs), and acetylpyridinium chloride were, respectively, the most commonly studied agents in the included studies. As confirmed by all systematic reviews, CHX and EO significantly control the plaque formation and gingival indices. Fluoride is another interesting reagent in oral care products that has shown promising results of oral health improvement, but the evidence quality needs to be refined. The synergy between natural plants and chemical products should be targeted in the future to accede to the formation of new, efficient, and healthy anticaries strategies. Moreover, to discover their biofilm-interfering or biofilm-inhibiting activities, effective clinical trials are needed. In this review article, therapeutic applications of herbal/chemical materials in oral biofilm infections are discussed in recent years (2010-2022).
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Biocompatible Materials; Biofilms; Chlorhexidine; Mouthwashes; Oils, Volatile
PubMed: 35958811
DOI: 10.1155/2022/8856025 -
BMC Cancer Apr 2023Oral mucositis (OM) is one of the main problems in almost all patients undergoing head and neck radiotherapy (RT). Owning to the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Oral mucositis (OM) is one of the main problems in almost all patients undergoing head and neck radiotherapy (RT). Owning to the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties of curcumin, the effect of both oral and topical formulations of curcumin was assessed on radiation-induced OM (ROM) in this study.
METHODS
The safety and efficacy of curcumin mouthwash 0.1% (w/v) and curcumin-nanocapsule were evaluated in ameliorating severity and pain/burning associated with OM during RT. The current randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted on 37 patients with head and neck cancers. Patients with grades 1 to 3 of ROM were randomized to receive one of the three interventions: curcumin mouthwash (0.1% w/v); Sinacurcumin soft gel containing 40 mg curcuminoids as nano-micelles (SinaCurcumin®40); or placebo mouthwash with a similar transparent appearance to curcumin mouthwash for 1 min three times daily during RT. Study evaluations were conducted at baseline and weekly thereafter for up to 3 weeks using the Numeric rating scale (NRS) and world health organization (WHO) scale.
RESULTS
Among the 45 patients randomized, 37 (mean (SD) age of 53.36 (15.99) years; 14 [37.8%] women) completed the treatment according to the protocol. Patients treated with either oral or topical curcumin showed a significantly reduced severity and burning related to OM during the first 3 weeks after administration (P-Value < 0.001) as compared with the placebo. At study termination, more than 33% of subjects utilizing curcumin mouthwash and 15% of patients utilizing curcumin-nanocapsule remained ulcer free while all of the placebo-receiving subjects had OM. The reduction of NRS and WHO scale between curcumin groups was comparable without significant differences.
CONCLUSION
Both curcumin mouthwash and nanocapsule were effective, safe, and well-tolerated in the treatment of radiation-induced OM. Higher doses of curcumin and larger sample sizes can be used for further investigation in future studies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
https://irct.ir/ IRCT20190810044500N17 (13/08/2021).
Topics: Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Curcumin; Mouthwashes; Nanocapsules; Stomatitis; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Double-Blind Method
PubMed: 37069504
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-10730-8 -
European Journal of Medical Research Mar 2023A significant percentage of head and neck cancer (HNCs) patients receiving RT experience oral mucositis (OM). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the polyherbal... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
A significant percentage of head and neck cancer (HNCs) patients receiving RT experience oral mucositis (OM). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the polyherbal (containing chamomile, peppermint oil, Aloe vera, and honey) and zinc mouthwashes in comparison to the control (chlorhexidine) and placebo groups for prevention of radiation-induced OM.
METHODS
This study was a double-blinded randomized clinical trial, conducted on 67 patients with HNCs undergoing radiotherapy. The eligible participants were randomized to receive either one of the following; zinc sulfate, polyherbal, chlorhexidine (Vi-one 0.2% CHX), or placebo mouthwash for 6 weeks. Follow-up evaluation of oral hygiene and the checklists of OM and the intensity of pain were filled out according to WHO assessment tool, Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) in all the participants weekly for seven consecutive weeks.
RESULTS
The results of present clinical trial demonstrated that the use of either zinc sulfate or polyherbal mouthwash significantly reduced the scores of OM and the severity of pain during weeks 2 to 7 after consumption compared with the CHX or placebo mouthwashes (P < 0.05). According to the post hoc analysis and compared with the placebo, a significantly better result was reported for zinc sulfate and polyherbal mouthwashes at weeks 2 to 7, but not for the CHX mouthwash.
CONCLUSION
This study showed that the use of zinc sulfate or polyherbal mouthwashes is effective in prevention of both OM severity scores and pain related to OM intensity at weeks 2 to 7 following consumption in HNCs patients. Trial registration IRCT20190123042475N1 and IRCT20190123042475N2. Registration date: 2019-06-09, 2019-07-26.
Topics: Humans; Mouthwashes; Zinc; Zinc Sulfate; Chlorhexidine; Stomatitis
PubMed: 36864527
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01015-8 -
Journal of Bacteriology Mar 2003
Review
Topics: Bacteria; Biofilms; Biological Transport; Chlorhexidine; Dental Plaque; Diffusion; Humans; Kinetics; Models, Biological; Mouthwashes; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Water
PubMed: 12591863
DOI: 10.1128/JB.185.5.1485-1491.2003 -
Blood Pressure Apr 2020Mouthwash is used by a large population. Short-term clinical trials have shown that antibacterial mouthwash deplete oral nitrate-reducing bacteria, and decrease... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
Mouthwash is used by a large population. Short-term clinical trials have shown that antibacterial mouthwash deplete oral nitrate-reducing bacteria, and decrease systemic nitric oxide bioavailability. Our previous publication from the San Juan Overweight Adults Longitudinal Study (SOALS) was the first to show frequent over-the-counter mouthwash use was independently associated with increased risk of prediabetes/diabetes. This manuscript evaluates whether over-the-counter mouthwash was associated with increased risk of hypertension. SOALS recruited 40-65 year old overweight/obese individuals; baseline evaluations started in 2011 and the 3-year follow-up exam was completed by 2016. From the 1028 participants (76%) who completed follow-up, we excluded people with reported physician diagnosis of hypertension or systolic or diastolic BP at or above the hypertension cut-offs ( = 481), missing smoking ( = 1), missing physical activity ( = 1) and missing alcohol intake ( = 5) at baseline; 540 participants were included. The primary exposure was mouthwash use twice daily or more. The primary outcome for this manuscript is self-reported physician-diagnosed hypertension over the follow-up. We used Poisson regression controlling for age, sex, smoking, physical activity, waist circumference, alcohol intake, systolic blood pressure, pre-diabetes/diabetes status and cardiac medication use. We additionally evaluated other mouthwash use categorizations. Twelve percent (66/540) developed hypertension over follow-up. People who used mouthwash twice/day or more had higher incidence of hypertension compared to less frequent users (Incidence Rate Ratio = 1.85; 95% Confidence Interval: 1.17, 2.94), and compared to non-users (IRR = 2.17; 95% CI: 1.27, 3.71). Several additional potential confounders evaluated did not impact these associations. Associations persisted among never smokers. Additional outcomes including BP assessed at a single study visit did not show associations. In this study, frequent regular use of over-the-counter mouthwash was associated with increased risk of hypertension, independent of major risk factors for hypertension and several other potential confounders.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Bacteria; Blood Pressure; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Incidence; Longitudinal Studies; Male; Middle Aged; Mouth; Mouthwashes; Nitric Oxide; Puerto Rico; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 31709856
DOI: 10.1080/08037051.2019.1680270