Randomized clinical trial of two oral care regimens in reducing and controlling established dental plaque and gingivitis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of a test regimen (TR) integrating the use of a commercially available triclosan, PVM/MA copolymer, and sodium fluoride containing toothpaste, an alcohol-free, fluoride-free cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash, and a manual toothbrush with cheek and tongue cleaner compared to a negative control regimen (NCR) integrating a commercially available 0.76% sodium monofluorophosphate toothpaste, a manual toothbrush and a fluoride-free and alcohol-free non-antibacterial mouthwash in the reduction and control of established plaque and gingivitis after 4 weeks of product use. METHOD: A 4-week, two-cell, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical study was conducted in Cedar Knolls, New Jersey, USA. Recruited subjects were randomly assigned to two regimens: (1) a commercially available toothpaste containing triclosan, PVM/MA copolymer, and 0.243% sodium fluoride, a manual toothbrush with cheek and tongue cleaner, and commercially available mouthwash containing 0.075% CPC in a fluoride-free and alcohol-free base (TR), or (2) a commercially available 0.76% sodium monofluorophosphate toothpaste, a manual toothbrush with rounded/polished bristles, and a fluoride-free and alcohol-free non-antibacterial mouthwash (NCR). Subjects were examined for dental plaque and gingivitis. Gingival, Gingival Severity, Gingival Interproximal, Plaque, Plaque Severity and Plaque Interproximal Index scores were calculated. For regimen comparison, independent t-test and ANCOVA analyses were performed. RESULTS: 130 subjects were screened; 120 enrolled; and 115 subjects completed the randomized clinical trial (RCT). After 4 weeks of product use, subjects using TR exhibited statistically significant (P < 0.001) reductions of 22.3%, 27.8% and 20.4% in mean Gingival, Gingival Severity and Gingival Interproximal Index scores, respectively, as compared to subjects using NCR. After 4 weeks of product use, subjects using TR exhibited statistically significant (P < 0.001) reductions of 28.2%, 60.7% and 27.6% in mean Plaque, Plaque Severity and Plaque Interproximal Index scores, respectively, as compared to subjects using NCR.

Efficacy of two fluoride-free, alcohol-free mouthwashes containing 0.075% or 0.07% CPC in controlling established dental plaque and gingivitis over a 6-week period on adults in Puerto Rico.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of two commercially available, fluoride-free, alcohol-free mouthwashes containing either 0.075% or 0.07% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) in controlling established dental plaque and gingivitis compared to a non-antibacterial control mouthwash. METHODS: A 6-week double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted in Trujillo Alto, Puerto Rico. Recruited subjects were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: (1) a fluoride-free, alcohol-free mouthwash containing 0.075% CPC (TG); (2) a fluoride-free, alcohol-free mouthwash containing 0.07% CPC (PC); and (3) a fluoride-free, alcohol-free mouthwash without antibacterial agent (NC). Subjects were instructed to rinse with the assigned mouthwash, after tooth brushing, twice daily (morning and evening). After 4 and 6 weeks of product use, subjects were examined for gingivitis (Whole Mouth Gingival, Gingival Interproximal, Gingival Severity Indexes) and plaque (Whole Mouth Plaque, Plaque Interproximal, and Plaque Severity Indexes) parameters. ANCOVA and post hoc Tukey's pair-wise comparisons (α = 0.05) were performed for treatment group comparisons. RESULTS: A total of 132 subjects were screened; 120 were enrolled; and 116 completed the study. After 6 weeks of product use, participants who rinsed with the CPC-containing mouthwashes exhibited statistically significant (P < 0.05) reductions in all the gingivitis and plaque parameters evaluated, whereas in those using the non-antibacterial mouthwash, significant reductions were only observed in whole mouth and interproximal plaque scores. No statistically significant (P > 0.05) differences were observed, with respect to the gingival and plaque parameters, between the two CPC-containing mouthwashes.

Efficacy of CPC and essential oils mouthwashes compared to a negative control mouthwash in controlling established dental plaque and gingivitis: A 6-week, randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of a mouthwash containing 0.075% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) in a fluoride-free, alcohol-free base and a mouthwash containing essential oils in a fluoride-free, 21.6% alcohol base as compared to a fluoride-free, alcohol-free non-antibacterial mouthwash in controlling established dental plaque and gingivitis after 6 weeks of twice daily use. METHODS: A 6-week, parallel-group, randomized double blind clinical trial was conducted in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. Recruited subjects were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: (1) a mouthwash containing 0.075% CPC in a fluoride-free, alcohol-free base (CPC); (2) a commercially-available mouthwash containing essential oils in a fluoride-free, 21.6% alcohol base (EO); or (3) a fluoride-free, alcohol-free non-antibacterial mouthwash (NC). Subjects were instructed to rinse with the assigned mouthwash, after tooth brushing, twice daily (morning and evening). After 4 and 6 weeks of product use, subjects were examined for gingivitis (Whole Mouth Gingival, Gingival Interproximal, Gingival Severity Indexes) and plaque (Whole Mouth Plaque, Plaque Interproximal, and Plaque Severity Indexes) parameters. For treatment group comparisons, ANCOVA and post hoc Tukey's pair-wise comparisons (α = 0.05) were performed. RESULTS: 132 subjects were screened; 120 were enrolled; and 116 completed the study. After 6 weeks of product use, subjects using the CPC and EO mouthwashes exhibited statistically significant (P < 0.001) reductions of all gingival and plaque measurements compared to subjects using the NC mouthwash. Subjects using the CPC mouthwash did not exhibit a statistically significant (P > 0.05) reduction with respect to gingival severity and all plaque measures (Whole, Interproximal, and Severity) when compared to EO mouthwash. Subjects using the CPC mouthwash exhibited statistically significant (P < 0.05) reductions in Gingival Index scores of 5.1% (P = 0.005), and Gingival Interproximal Index scores of 5.5% (P = 0.016) relative to subjects using the EO mouthwash. These reductions were not considered clinically significant.