Efficacy of chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide and tulsi extract mouthwash in reducing halitosis using spectrophotometric analysis: A randomized controlled trial.
Journal
Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry
ISSN: 1989-5488
Titre abrégé: J Clin Exp Dent
Pays: Spain
ID NLM: 101603132
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2019
May 2019
Historique:
received:
21
12
2018
accepted:
13
04
2019
entrez:
6
7
2019
pubmed:
6
7
2019
medline:
6
7
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate the efficacy of tulsi extract mouthrinse in reducing halitosis as compared to chlorhexidine and hydrogen peroxide mouthrinses using spectrophotometric analysis. It was a parallel, single center, double blinded randomized controlled trial of 15 days duration. A total of 300 participants were screened, out of which 45 subjects those fulfilled inclusion criteria of age range 17-35 years were included in the trial. The participants were randomly provided with tulsi, hydrogen peroxide or chlorhexidine mouthwashes (control group) to use 10 ml twice daily for 15 days. Clinical measurements were taken at baseline and 15 days using arbitrary 0-5 scale for organoleptic odor assessments, spectrophotometric analysis for Volatile Sulphide Compounds (VSCs) from saliva samples, Löe & Silness gingival index and Silness & Löe plaque index. After intervention, organoleptic, VSCs, gingival and plaque scores showed statistically significant decrease in all the three study groups. The mean percentage reduction in VSC and organoleptic scores was significantly greater in chlorhexidine and hydrogen peroxide groups than in the tulsi group and the mean percentage reduction in plaque and gingival scores was significantly greater in chlorhexidine group than in hydrogen peroxide and tulsi group. Tulsi may not have the efficacy of chlorhexidine and hydrogen peroxide mouthrinses. But, Tulsi is effective in reducing halitosis, plaque and gingivitis and with its lack of side effects & cost effectiveness, can be an effective & economic tool to deal with halitosis. The spectrophotometric technique appears to be a promising method for evaluation of oral malodor.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the efficacy of tulsi extract mouthrinse in reducing halitosis as compared to chlorhexidine and hydrogen peroxide mouthrinses using spectrophotometric analysis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
METHODS
It was a parallel, single center, double blinded randomized controlled trial of 15 days duration. A total of 300 participants were screened, out of which 45 subjects those fulfilled inclusion criteria of age range 17-35 years were included in the trial. The participants were randomly provided with tulsi, hydrogen peroxide or chlorhexidine mouthwashes (control group) to use 10 ml twice daily for 15 days. Clinical measurements were taken at baseline and 15 days using arbitrary 0-5 scale for organoleptic odor assessments, spectrophotometric analysis for Volatile Sulphide Compounds (VSCs) from saliva samples, Löe & Silness gingival index and Silness & Löe plaque index.
RESULTS
RESULTS
After intervention, organoleptic, VSCs, gingival and plaque scores showed statistically significant decrease in all the three study groups. The mean percentage reduction in VSC and organoleptic scores was significantly greater in chlorhexidine and hydrogen peroxide groups than in the tulsi group and the mean percentage reduction in plaque and gingival scores was significantly greater in chlorhexidine group than in hydrogen peroxide and tulsi group.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Tulsi may not have the efficacy of chlorhexidine and hydrogen peroxide mouthrinses. But, Tulsi is effective in reducing halitosis, plaque and gingivitis and with its lack of side effects & cost effectiveness, can be an effective & economic tool to deal with halitosis. The spectrophotometric technique appears to be a promising method for evaluation of oral malodor.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31275519
doi: 10.4317/jced.55523
pii: 55523
pmc: PMC6599699
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e457-e463Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement:Nil.
Références
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1976 Aug;42(2):172-81
pubmed: 1066599
J Can Dent Assoc. 2000 May;66(5):257-61
pubmed: 10833869
J Clin Periodontol. 2001 Sep;28(9):813-9
pubmed: 11493349
Periodontol 2000. 2002;28:256-79
pubmed: 12013345
J Clin Periodontol. 2003 May;30(5):427-34
pubmed: 12716335
Radiology. 2003 May;227(2):309-13
pubmed: 12732691
J Clin Dent. 1992;3(4):111-5
pubmed: 1339126
Acta Odontol Scand. 1963 Dec;21:533-51
pubmed: 14121956
Acta Odontol Scand. 1964 Feb;22:121-35
pubmed: 14158464
J Periodontol. 1992 Sep;63(9):776-82
pubmed: 1474479
J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Feb;31(2):85-90
pubmed: 15016031
J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Oct;31(10):878-84
pubmed: 15367192
J Periodontol. 1992 Jan;63(1):39-43
pubmed: 1552460
J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Dec;31(12):1128-34
pubmed: 15560817
Indian J Physiol Pharmacol. 2005 Apr;49(2):125-31
pubmed: 16170979
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008 Aug;32(2):174-9
pubmed: 18565739
Indian J Dent Res. 2010 Jul-Sep;21(3):357-9
pubmed: 20930344
J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2011 Jul;15(3):250-4
pubmed: 22028512
Pharmacogn Rev. 2010 Jan;4(7):95-105
pubmed: 22228948
J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2014 Apr;5(2):109-16
pubmed: 24948862
J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2014 May;18(3):316-20
pubmed: 25024544
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2016 Mar;37(3):174-178;quiz180
pubmed: 26977897
J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Sep;11(9):ZC79-ZC83
pubmed: 29207840
J Dent Res. 1994 Sep;73(9):1568-74
pubmed: 7929993
Nurs Res. 1993 Nov-Dec;42(6):332-7
pubmed: 8247815
J Dent Res. 1993 Aug;72(8):1194-7
pubmed: 8360362
J Am Dent Assoc. 1996 Apr;127(4):475-82
pubmed: 8655868