Six‐month study of the effects of a chlorhexidine mouthrinse on gingivitis in adults
Ehud GrossmanGabriel ReiterO. P. SturzenbergerManuel de la RosaT. D. DickinsonG. A. FlrrettiG. E. LudlamA. H. Meckel
151
Citation
24
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
The effects of a chlorhexidine gluconate mouthrinse on plaque and gingivitis were studied among 430 adults in a six‐month clinical trial. Subjects were divided in two comparable treatment groups matched for age, sex, and initial gingivitis severity. Following a thorough oral prophylaxis, they were instructed to rinse twice a day for 30 seconds with 15 ml of a 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthrinse or a placebo mouthrinse. After three and six months of mouthrinse use, the chlorhexidine group had significantly less gingivitis, gingival bleeding, and plaque accumulation compared to the placebo group. As expected, accumulation of dental calculus and extrinsic dental stain increased in the chlorbexidine group. No significant differences in adverse oral soft tissue effects were observed between the two groups. Since use of oral antimicrobial agents has been reported to produce tooth and tongue stain, gingivitis examinations were done with and without tooth covers to eliminate the potential for examiner bias. Comparable reductions in the Gingival Index scores and gingival bleeding were obtained when the evaluations were conducted with or without the tooth covers. It was concluded that a 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthrinse can provide an important adjunct to the prevention and control of gingivitis when used with regular personal oral hygiene procedures and professional care.Keywords:
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Dental plaque
Antiseptic
Bleeding on probing
Dental Prophylaxis
Antiseptic
Gingival inflammation
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Cite
Citations (18)
The purpose of this study was to compare the antimicrobic efficacies of four formulations of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) for handwashing under frequent-use conditions. Fifty volunteers were assigned by block randomization to one of five products: one of two liquid detergents containing 4% CHG, a liquid detergent containing 2% CHG, a foam containing 4% CHG, and a nonantiseptic soap (control). Subjects washed their hands by a standardized technique 15 times per day for 5 days. After days 1 and 5 of handwashing, there was a significant reduction in log CFU for subjects using all four CHG-containing products compared with subjects using control soap and for subjects within each group after days 1 and 5 compared with the base-line CFU counts (all P less than 0.05). There were no significant differences between the four CHG products at any testing time. We conclude that all four formulations are satisfactory for clinical use.
Antiseptic
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Cite
Citations (36)
It is common practice to use topical antiseptic formulations prior to specific therapy in superficial infections and injuries, but not in corneal bacterial ulcers. There is accumulating evidence proving chlorhexidine gluconate 0.02%, an antiseptic agent, as an effective treatment for infectious keratitis.To investigate the safety and efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate 0.02% as an adjunct therapy for corneal bacterial ulcers.Twenty-six patients with corneal bacterial ulcers were treated with standard empirical antibiotic treatment. The study group was treated with chlorhexidine gluconate 0.02% while controls received placebo for one week. The patients were followed for at least 1 month.No allergic or toxic reactions were noted. Although a higher baseline severity of ulcers existed in the study group, no differences were found in final vision, scarring extent, or recovery duration.Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.02% may improve the clinical course of corneal ulcers.
Antiseptic
Chlorhexidine gluconate
corneal ulcer
Corneal ulceration
Acanthamoeba keratitis
Cite
Citations (8)
Since in dogs the bacterial count is higher in the oral cavity than on the skin surface, it is very important to select an effective antiseptic that would greatly reduce the number of intraoral pathogenic microorganisms, thereby reducing the frequency of postoperative complications, especially postoperative infections after intraoral procedures.
The objective of this study was to investigate the basic aerobic bacterial micro- flora in the dog mouth and to investigate the antiseptic efficacy of 0 4% chlo- rhexidine gluconate and 1% povidone-iodine on mandibular gingival mucous membrane. A total of 45 dogs were divided into three groups. The CH group was treated with 0.4% chlorhexidine gluconate, the PI group with 1% povidone-iodine and the SL group with saline Swabs were taken from the mandibular gingiva, before and after treatment with antiseptic solution. The number of bacteria
was determined using the semiquantitative method, and the identification of bacterial colonies was performed after colonization of individual colonies on blood agar. Of the total 90 swabs, 30 species of aerobic bacteria were isolated and identified. Regarding antiseptic efficiency, both chlorhexidine pluconate and povidone-iodine showed statistically significant reductions of prowth of bacterial colonies compared to the control group.
There were no differences between the two tested antiseptics regarding their efficacy in reducing the growth of bacterial colonies, and the number of positive swabs obtained after rinsing with chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine was identical. Based on the results, a 2-minute flush with 0 4% chlorhexidine gluconate or 1% povidone-iodine is recommended for presurgical preparation of the oral cavity in dops.
Antiseptic
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Bacterial colony
Cite
Citations (0)
Nosocomial infection remains a complex problem in hospitals, with high morbidity and mortality. It cause a longer treatment time and spend a lot of cost. WHO reported nosocomial infection prevalence varies between 3% - 21%, and surgical wound infection include 5% - 34% of the total number of nosocomial infections. This research comparing Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% and Povidone iodine 1% as an antiseptic to decrease density level of intraoral germs in maxillofacial fracture surgery. The result is there is no difference between the use of Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% and 1% povidone iodine as an antiseptic in reducing the level of intra-oral bacterial density in maxillofacial fracture surgery (p = 0.698). Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% as an antiseptic on the intra-oral maxillofacial fractures can significantly reduce the level of intra-oral bacterial density (p = 0.0001). Povidone iodine 1% as an antiseptic on the intra-oral maxillofacial fractures can significantly reduce the level of intra-oral bacterial density (p = 0.0001).
Antiseptic
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Cite
Citations (0)
The aim of this study was to compare 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, 7.5% povidone iodine and liquid soap, which are used as hand washing solutions for the immediate, cumulative and residual effects in bacterial growth. For this purpose, 18 volunteers washed their hands with 7.5% povidone iodine, 4% chlorhexidine gluconate and liquid soap by applying standard hygienic hand washing technique. In order to find out the bacterial amount in the hands of study group, glove liquid test was used. For the evaluation of immediate effects, samples were collected just after the washing procedure, for the residual effects samples were collected from gloved hands after 3 hours, and for the cumulative effects, samples were collected after 5 days with daily hand washings. It is found that the immediate effects of 4% chlorhexidine gluconate was superior than others, and 7.5% povidone iodine was superior to liquid soap. There was no difference between 4% chlorhexidine gluconate and 7.5% povidone iodine for residual effects. The cumulative effects were observed for 4% chlorhexidine gluconate and 7.5% povidone iodine, while there was no cumulative effect for liquid soap. According to these results, it can be suggested that 4% chlorhexidine gluconate can be used as a reliable antiseptic agent in the hospitals, especially for laboratories, intensive care units and operating rooms, owing to its favourable immediate, residual and cumulative effects.
Antiseptic
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Cite
Citations (4)
Antiseptic
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Cite
Citations (116)
ChloraPrep (2% chlorhexidine gluconate + 70% isopropyl alcohol [CHG + IPA] in a 3.0-mL applicator) is a recently approved antiseptic for preoperative skin preparation. This controlled open-label trial assessed the immediate and persistent antimicrobial efficacy and safety of CHG + IPA compared with 70% IPA or a 2% CHG aqueous solution alone. Each antiseptic significantly reduced abdominal and inguinal microbial counts from baseline at 10 minutes, 6 hours, and 24 hours ( P =.0001). CHG + IPA provided significantly more persistent antimicrobial activity on abdominal sites than IPA ( P =.003) or CHG ( P =.028) at 24 hours. No skin irritations were reported for any of the three antiseptics.
Antiseptic
Isopropyl alcohol
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Cite
Citations (124)
We conducted a randomized controlled trial in neonates with birth weight greater than or equal to 1,500 g that compared 1% aqueous chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) with 10% povidone-iodine (PI) as a topical antiseptic. We found 1% CHG to be more effective than 1% PI in reducing blood culture contamination rates, and no contact dermatitis was observed.
Antiseptic
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Blood Culture
Cite
Citations (47)
This article reviews the results and conclusions from four pivotal and two comparative clinical trials. The six randomized, controlled, single-blinded, parallel-group clinical trials were conducted to determine which antiseptic is best for use as a patient preoperative skin preparation. The objective of these studies was to compare the immediate, persistent (residual), and cumulative antimicrobial efficacy and safety of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) combined with 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) (ChloraPrep); another combination CHG and IPA antiseptic (CHG+IPA) and 2% aqueous CHG alone; 4% CHG (Hibiclens) alone; 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) alone; and an iodine-containing solution, 10% povidone-iodine (Betadine) alone as preoperative skin topical antiseptics for potential prevention of nosocomial infections.
Antiseptic
Isopropyl alcohol
Chlorhexidine gluconate
Cite
Citations (97)