...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology >Comparative evaluation of anti-plaque efficacy of herbal and 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash in a 4-day plaque re-growth study
【24h】

Comparative evaluation of anti-plaque efficacy of herbal and 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash in a 4-day plaque re-growth study

机译:在4天的斑块重生研究中比较草药和0.2%葡萄糖酸氯己定漱口水的抗斑块功效

获取原文
           

摘要

Background:Chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash has earned eponym of gold standard to treat and/or prevent periodontal disease. However, it has been reported to have local side-effects on long-term use. To explore a herbal alternative, the present study was carried out with an aim to compare the anti-plaque efficacy of a herbal mouthwash with 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash and normal saline.Materials and Methods:It was an examiner-blinded, parallel designed clinical trial, in which 90 pre-clinical dental students with gingival index (GI) ≤1 were enrolled. To begin with, GI and plaque index (PI) were recorded. Then, baseline plaque scores were brought to zero by professionally cleaning the teeth with scaling and polishing. After that, randomized 3 groups were made (of 30 subjects each - after excluding the drop-outs) who were refrained from regular mechanical oral hygiene measures. Subjects were asked to swish with respective mouthwash (0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash, herbal mouthwash, or normal saline) as per therapeutic dose for 4 days. Then, GI and PI scores were re-evaluated on 5th day by the same investigator, and the differences were compared statistically by ANOVA and Student's ‘t’-test.Results and Observations:Least post-rinsing GI and PI scores were demonstrated with 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash, followed by herbal mouthwash and highest scores with normal saline. The difference of post-rinsing PI scores between the chlorhexidine and herbal mouthwash groups was statistically non-significant, whereas this difference was significant between chlorhexidine and saline groups, and the difference between herbal and saline groups was non-significant. It was concluded that 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash remains the best anti-plaque agent. However, when socio-economic factor and/or side-effects of chlorhexidine need consideration, presently tested herbal mouthwash may be considered as a good alternative.
机译:背景:葡萄糖酸氯己定漱口水已成为治疗和/或预防牙周疾病的金标准的缩写。但是,据报道对长期使用有局部副作用。为了探索草药替代品,进行了本研究,目的是比较0.2%葡萄糖酸洗必泰漱口水和生理盐水的草药漱口水的抗牙菌斑功效。材料与方法:这是一种由检查员盲目平行设计的临床方法该试验招募了90名临床前牙龈指数(GI)≤1的牙科学生。首先,记录GI和菌斑指数(PI)。然后,通过除垢和抛光专业清洁牙齿,使牙菌斑的基线分数降至零。此后,随机分为3组(每组30名受试者-排除辍学者),这些组应避免常规的机械口腔卫生措施。要求受试者按照治疗剂量分别漱口(0.2%葡萄糖酸氯己定漱口水,草药漱口水或生理盐水)漱口4天。然后,由同一研究人员在第5天对GI和PI评分进行重新评估,并通过ANOVA和Student't检验对差异进行统计学比较。结果与观察:漂洗后的GI和PI评分最低为0.2 %葡萄糖酸洗必太漱口水,其次是草本漱口水和生理盐水得分最高。洗必泰和草药漱口水组之间的漂洗后PI评分差异在统计学上无统计学意义,而洗必泰和生理盐水组之间的差异有统计学意义,而草药和生理盐水组之间的差异无统计学意义。结论是0.2%葡萄糖酸洗必太漱口剂仍然是最好的抗牙菌斑剂。但是,当需要考虑洗必泰的社会经济因素和/或副作用时,可以将目前经测试的草本漱口水视为一种不错的选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号