Research Article
Year 2019,
Volume: 22 Issue: 2, 235 - 240, 31.05.2019
Abstract
References
- 1. SwaninathanY.Thomas JT, Muralidharan NP. The Efficacy Of Preprocedural Mouth Rinse Of 0.2% Chlorhexidine And Commercially Available Herbal Mouth Containing SalvadoraPersica In Reducing The Bacterial Load In Saliva And Aerosol Produced During Scaling. Asian J Pharm Clin Res 2014; 7(1): 71-4.
- 2. Acharya S,Priya H, Purohit B, Bhat M. Aerosol contamination in a Rural University Dental Clinic in South India. Int J Infect Control 2010; 6:1-7.
- 3. Snophia S, M.Manimegalai, Uma S, Sopia: Comparison of efficacy of preprocedural rinsing with chlorhexidine and essential oil mouth in reducing viable bacteria in dental aerosols- a microbiological study. Int J of Contemporary Dentistry 2011; 2(6): 1-6.
- 4. Bentley CD, Burkhart NW, Crawford JJ. Evaluating spatter and aerosol contamination during dental procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125(5): 579-84.
- 5. Reddy S, Prasad MGS, Kaul S, Satish K Efficacy of 0.2% tempered chlorhexidine as a preprocedural mouth rinse: A clinical study .J Indian Soc Periodontol 2012;16(2): 213–17.
- 6. Saini R. Efficacy of preprocedural mouth rinse containing chlorine dioxide in reduction of viable bacterial count in dental aerosols during ultrasonic scaling: A double‑blind, placebo‑controlled clinical trial. Dent Hypotheses 2015; 6: 65‑71.
- 7. Gupta G, Mitra D, Ashok, Soni S Comparison of Efficacy of Pre- Procedural Mouth Rinsing in Reducing Aerosol Contamination Produced by Ultrasonic Scaler: A Pilot Study . J Periodontol 2014; 85: 562-68.
- 8. Armitage GC. Periodontal diseases: Diagnosis. Ann Periodontol 1996; 1:3 7-215.
- 9. Deepa G. Kamath, Nayak S. Detection, removal and prevention of calculus: LiteratureReview. Saudi Dent J 2014; 26(1): 7-13.
- 10. Guntaas S, Kunal K. A Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of 0.2% Chlorhexidine with a Herbal Mouthwash as Pre-Procedural Mouthrinse in the Reduction of Aerosol Contamination Produced by Ultrasonic Scaler. Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 2018; 2(7): 2-6.
- 11. Loe H, Silness J. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. I. Prevalence and severity. Acta Odontol Scand. 1963; 21: 533–51
- 12. Fine DH, Mendieta C, Barnett ML, Furgang D, Meyers R, Olshan A et al. Efficacy of preprocedural rinsewith an antiseptic in reducing 0viable bacteria in dental aerosol. J Periodontal 1992; 63: 821-24.
- 13. Logothetis DD, Martinez-Welles JM. Reducing bacterial aerosol contamination with a chlorhexidine gluconate pre-rinse. J Am Dent Assoc 1995; 126: 1634-39.
- 14. Son WK, Shin SY, Kye SB, Yang SM. The effect of chlorhexidine on reduction of viable organisms in aerosol produced by ultrasonic scaler. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2009; 39: 303-10.
- 15. Santos A. Evidence-based control of plaque and gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30 Suppl 5: 13-6.
- 16. Yadav S, Kumar S, Srivastava P, Gupta KK, Gupta J, Khan YS. Comparison of efficacy of three different mouthwashes in reducing aerosol contamination produced by ultrasonic scaler: A pilot study. Indian J Dent Sci 2018; 10: 6-10
- 17. Bhat N, Mitra R, Reddy JJ, Oza S, Vinayak KM. Evaluation of efficacy of chlorhexidine and a herbal mouthwash on dental plaque: An in vitro comparative study. Int J Pharm Bio Sci 2013; 4: 625-32
- 18. A M Khalessi, A R C Pack, W M Thomson, G R Tompkins: An in vivo study of the plaque control efficacy of Persica: A commercially available herbal mouthwash containing extracts of Salvadora persica. International Dental Journal 2004; 54(5): 279-83.
- 19. Swaminathan Y, Toby Thomas J, Muralidharan NP. The efficacy of preprocedural mouth rinse of 0.2% chlorhexidine and commercially available herbal mouth containing salvadora persica in reducing the bacterial load in saliva and aerosol produced during scaling. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2014; 7(1): 71-4.
- 20. Rani KR, Ambati M, Prasanna JS, Pinnamaneni I, Reddy PV, Rajashree D. Chemical vs. herbal formulations as pre-procedural mouth rinses to combat aerosol production: A randomized controlled study. J Oral Res Rev 2014; 6: 9-13
- 21. Harrel SK, Barnes J and Hidalgo FR. Reduction of Aerosols Produced by Ultrasonic Scalers. J Periodontol 1996; 67: 28-32.
- 22. King BT, Muzzin K, Berry CW and Anders L .The Effectiveness of an Aerosol Reduction Device for Ultrasonic Scalers. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 45-9.
- 23. Woo Kyung Son, Seung-Yun Shin, Beom Kye and Seung-Min Yang. The effect of chlorhexidine on reduction of viable organisms in aerosol produced by ultrasonic scaler. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2009; 39(3): 303-10.
- 24. Purohit B, Priya H, Acharya S, Bhat M, Ballal M. Efficacy of pre-procedural rinsing in reducing aerosol contamination during dental procedures. Journal of Infection Prevention. 2009; 10(6): 190-92. Available from, DOI: 10.1177/1757177409350234
Evaluation and Comparison of Two Commercially Available Mouthrinses in Reducing Aerolised Bacteria During Ultrasonic Scaling When Used as a Preprocedural Rinse.
Abstract
Objective:To
compare and evaluate the effect of 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate and
commercially available herbal mouthrinse in reducing aerolized bacteria when
used as a preprocedural
mouth rinse.
compare and evaluate the effect of 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate and
commercially available herbal mouthrinse in reducing aerolized bacteria when
used as a preprocedural
mouth rinse.
Materials and Methods:A total of 45 patients were
selected and randomly divided into three groups. Group I consisted of 15
patients who rinsed with distilled water for 60 seconds. Group II consisted of
15 patients who rinsed with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash (Clohex®) for 60 seconds and Group
III consisted of 15 patients who rinsed with herbal mouthwash (Hiora®) for
60 seconds. Aerosols produced during the oral prophylaxis procedure were
collected on blood agar plates by exposing the plates at patient’s and
dentist’s chest area and the exposed plates were incubated at 37°c aerobically
for 48 hours. The number of colony forming units (CFU) in aerosol and CFU in
the saliva were counted and statistically analyzed.
selected and randomly divided into three groups. Group I consisted of 15
patients who rinsed with distilled water for 60 seconds. Group II consisted of
15 patients who rinsed with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash (Clohex®) for 60 seconds and Group
III consisted of 15 patients who rinsed with herbal mouthwash (Hiora®) for
60 seconds. Aerosols produced during the oral prophylaxis procedure were
collected on blood agar plates by exposing the plates at patient’s and
dentist’s chest area and the exposed plates were incubated at 37°c aerobically
for 48 hours. The number of colony forming units (CFU) in aerosol and CFU in
the saliva were counted and statistically analyzed.
Results:Reduction
in the bacterial load using 0.2% of chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash is found
to be significant at both patient’s and dentist’s chest area in aerosol
produced during scaling followed by herbal mouthrinse.
in the bacterial load using 0.2% of chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash is found
to be significant at both patient’s and dentist’s chest area in aerosol
produced during scaling followed by herbal mouthrinse.
Conclusion:The
results of the present study clearly indicate that pre-procedural rinsing with
0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate was significantly more effective than herbal
mouthrinse in reducing the aerolized bacteria during ultrasonic scaling. Therefore
a pre-procedural rinse can significantly reduce the risk for cross
contamination.
results of the present study clearly indicate that pre-procedural rinsing with
0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate was significantly more effective than herbal
mouthrinse in reducing the aerolized bacteria during ultrasonic scaling. Therefore
a pre-procedural rinse can significantly reduce the risk for cross
contamination.
Keywords
References
- 1. SwaninathanY.Thomas JT, Muralidharan NP. The Efficacy Of Preprocedural Mouth Rinse Of 0.2% Chlorhexidine And Commercially Available Herbal Mouth Containing SalvadoraPersica In Reducing The Bacterial Load In Saliva And Aerosol Produced During Scaling. Asian J Pharm Clin Res 2014; 7(1): 71-4.
- 2. Acharya S,Priya H, Purohit B, Bhat M. Aerosol contamination in a Rural University Dental Clinic in South India. Int J Infect Control 2010; 6:1-7.
- 3. Snophia S, M.Manimegalai, Uma S, Sopia: Comparison of efficacy of preprocedural rinsing with chlorhexidine and essential oil mouth in reducing viable bacteria in dental aerosols- a microbiological study. Int J of Contemporary Dentistry 2011; 2(6): 1-6.
- 4. Bentley CD, Burkhart NW, Crawford JJ. Evaluating spatter and aerosol contamination during dental procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125(5): 579-84.
- 5. Reddy S, Prasad MGS, Kaul S, Satish K Efficacy of 0.2% tempered chlorhexidine as a preprocedural mouth rinse: A clinical study .J Indian Soc Periodontol 2012;16(2): 213–17.
- 6. Saini R. Efficacy of preprocedural mouth rinse containing chlorine dioxide in reduction of viable bacterial count in dental aerosols during ultrasonic scaling: A double‑blind, placebo‑controlled clinical trial. Dent Hypotheses 2015; 6: 65‑71.
- 7. Gupta G, Mitra D, Ashok, Soni S Comparison of Efficacy of Pre- Procedural Mouth Rinsing in Reducing Aerosol Contamination Produced by Ultrasonic Scaler: A Pilot Study . J Periodontol 2014; 85: 562-68.
- 8. Armitage GC. Periodontal diseases: Diagnosis. Ann Periodontol 1996; 1:3 7-215.
- 9. Deepa G. Kamath, Nayak S. Detection, removal and prevention of calculus: LiteratureReview. Saudi Dent J 2014; 26(1): 7-13.
- 10. Guntaas S, Kunal K. A Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of 0.2% Chlorhexidine with a Herbal Mouthwash as Pre-Procedural Mouthrinse in the Reduction of Aerosol Contamination Produced by Ultrasonic Scaler. Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 2018; 2(7): 2-6.
- 11. Loe H, Silness J. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. I. Prevalence and severity. Acta Odontol Scand. 1963; 21: 533–51
- 12. Fine DH, Mendieta C, Barnett ML, Furgang D, Meyers R, Olshan A et al. Efficacy of preprocedural rinsewith an antiseptic in reducing 0viable bacteria in dental aerosol. J Periodontal 1992; 63: 821-24.
- 13. Logothetis DD, Martinez-Welles JM. Reducing bacterial aerosol contamination with a chlorhexidine gluconate pre-rinse. J Am Dent Assoc 1995; 126: 1634-39.
- 14. Son WK, Shin SY, Kye SB, Yang SM. The effect of chlorhexidine on reduction of viable organisms in aerosol produced by ultrasonic scaler. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2009; 39: 303-10.
- 15. Santos A. Evidence-based control of plaque and gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30 Suppl 5: 13-6.
- 16. Yadav S, Kumar S, Srivastava P, Gupta KK, Gupta J, Khan YS. Comparison of efficacy of three different mouthwashes in reducing aerosol contamination produced by ultrasonic scaler: A pilot study. Indian J Dent Sci 2018; 10: 6-10
- 17. Bhat N, Mitra R, Reddy JJ, Oza S, Vinayak KM. Evaluation of efficacy of chlorhexidine and a herbal mouthwash on dental plaque: An in vitro comparative study. Int J Pharm Bio Sci 2013; 4: 625-32
- 18. A M Khalessi, A R C Pack, W M Thomson, G R Tompkins: An in vivo study of the plaque control efficacy of Persica: A commercially available herbal mouthwash containing extracts of Salvadora persica. International Dental Journal 2004; 54(5): 279-83.
- 19. Swaminathan Y, Toby Thomas J, Muralidharan NP. The efficacy of preprocedural mouth rinse of 0.2% chlorhexidine and commercially available herbal mouth containing salvadora persica in reducing the bacterial load in saliva and aerosol produced during scaling. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2014; 7(1): 71-4.
- 20. Rani KR, Ambati M, Prasanna JS, Pinnamaneni I, Reddy PV, Rajashree D. Chemical vs. herbal formulations as pre-procedural mouth rinses to combat aerosol production: A randomized controlled study. J Oral Res Rev 2014; 6: 9-13
- 21. Harrel SK, Barnes J and Hidalgo FR. Reduction of Aerosols Produced by Ultrasonic Scalers. J Periodontol 1996; 67: 28-32.
- 22. King BT, Muzzin K, Berry CW and Anders L .The Effectiveness of an Aerosol Reduction Device for Ultrasonic Scalers. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 45-9.
- 23. Woo Kyung Son, Seung-Yun Shin, Beom Kye and Seung-Min Yang. The effect of chlorhexidine on reduction of viable organisms in aerosol produced by ultrasonic scaler. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2009; 39(3): 303-10.
- 24. Purohit B, Priya H, Acharya S, Bhat M, Ballal M. Efficacy of pre-procedural rinsing in reducing aerosol contamination during dental procedures. Journal of Infection Prevention. 2009; 10(6): 190-92. Available from, DOI: 10.1177/1757177409350234
There are 24 citations in total.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Health Care Administration |
| Journal Section | Original Research Articles |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | May 31, 2019 |
| Submission Date | January 18, 2019 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2019Volume: 22 Issue: 2 |
Cited By
Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Chlorhexidine and Herbal Mouthwash as a Preprocedural Rinse in Reducing Dental Aerosols: A Microbiological Study
International Journal of Dentistry
Sangeeta Umesh Nayak
https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2021082
Cumhuriyet Dental Journal (Cumhuriyet Dent J, CDJ) is the official publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. CDJ is an international journal dedicated to the latest advancement of dentistry. The aim of this journal is to provide a platform for scientists and academicians all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in different areas of dentistry. First issue of the Journal of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry was published in 1998. In 2010, journal's name was changed as Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. Journal’s publication language is English.
CDJ accepts articles in English. Submitting a paper to CDJ is free of charges. In addition, CDJ has not have article processing charges.
Frequency: Four times a year (March, June, September, and December)
IMPORTANT NOTICE
All users of Cumhuriyet Dental Journal should visit to their user's home page through the "https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/user" " or "https://dergipark.org.tr/en/user" links to update their incomplete information shown in blue or yellow warnings and update their e-mail addresses and information to the DergiPark system. Otherwise, the e-mails from the journal will not be seen or fall into the SPAM folder. Please fill in all missing part in the relevant field.
Please visit journal's AUTHOR GUIDELINE to see revised policy and submission rules to be held since 2020.