Comparative effectiveness of Propolis with chlorhexidine mouthwash on gingivitis – a randomized controlled clinical study

2区 医学 Q1 Medicine
Shilpa Gunjal, Deepak Gowda Sadashivappa Pateel
{"title":"Comparative effectiveness of Propolis with chlorhexidine mouthwash on gingivitis – a randomized controlled clinical study","authors":"Shilpa Gunjal, Deepak Gowda Sadashivappa Pateel","doi":"10.1186/s12906-024-04456-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To assess and compare the effectiveness of propolis mouthwash with chlorhexidine mouthwash in the reduction of plaque and gingivitis. A single centre, latin-square cross-over, double masked, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 45 chronic generalized gingivitis subjects who were chosen from the dental clinic of MAHSA University, Malaysia. A total of 45 subjects were randomly assigned into one of the three different groups (n = 15 each) using a computer-generated random allocation sequence: Group A Propolis mouthwash; Group B Chlorhexidine mouthwash; and Group C Placebo mouthwash. Supragingival plaque and gingival inflammation were assessed by full mouth Plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) at baseline and after 21 days. The study was divided into three phases, each phase lasted for 21 days separated by a washout period of 15 days in between them. Groups A, B and C were treated with 0.2% Propolis, Chlorhexidine, and Placebo mouthwash, respectively, in phase I. The study subjects were instructed to use the assigned mouthwash twice daily for 1 min for 21 days. On day 22nd, the subjects were recalled for measurement of PI and GI. After phase I, mouthwash was crossed over as dictated by the Latin square design in phase II and III. At baseline, intergroup comparison revealed no statistically significant difference between Groups A, B and C (p > 0.05). On day 21, one-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant difference between the three groups for PI (p < 0.001) and GI (p < 0.001). Bonferroni post-hoc test showed statistically significant difference between Propolis and Chlorhexidine mouthwash (P < 0.001), with higher reduction in the mean plaque and gingival scores in propolis group compared to chlorhexidine and placebo groups. Propolis mouthwash demonstrated significant improvement in gingival health and plaque reduction. Thus, it could be used as an effective herbal mouthwash alternative to chlorhexidine mouthwash. The trial was retrospectively registered on 25/07/2019 at clinicaltrials.gov and its identifier is NCT04032548.","PeriodicalId":9132,"journal":{"name":"BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-024-04456-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To assess and compare the effectiveness of propolis mouthwash with chlorhexidine mouthwash in the reduction of plaque and gingivitis. A single centre, latin-square cross-over, double masked, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 45 chronic generalized gingivitis subjects who were chosen from the dental clinic of MAHSA University, Malaysia. A total of 45 subjects were randomly assigned into one of the three different groups (n = 15 each) using a computer-generated random allocation sequence: Group A Propolis mouthwash; Group B Chlorhexidine mouthwash; and Group C Placebo mouthwash. Supragingival plaque and gingival inflammation were assessed by full mouth Plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) at baseline and after 21 days. The study was divided into three phases, each phase lasted for 21 days separated by a washout period of 15 days in between them. Groups A, B and C were treated with 0.2% Propolis, Chlorhexidine, and Placebo mouthwash, respectively, in phase I. The study subjects were instructed to use the assigned mouthwash twice daily for 1 min for 21 days. On day 22nd, the subjects were recalled for measurement of PI and GI. After phase I, mouthwash was crossed over as dictated by the Latin square design in phase II and III. At baseline, intergroup comparison revealed no statistically significant difference between Groups A, B and C (p > 0.05). On day 21, one-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant difference between the three groups for PI (p < 0.001) and GI (p < 0.001). Bonferroni post-hoc test showed statistically significant difference between Propolis and Chlorhexidine mouthwash (P < 0.001), with higher reduction in the mean plaque and gingival scores in propolis group compared to chlorhexidine and placebo groups. Propolis mouthwash demonstrated significant improvement in gingival health and plaque reduction. Thus, it could be used as an effective herbal mouthwash alternative to chlorhexidine mouthwash. The trial was retrospectively registered on 25/07/2019 at clinicaltrials.gov and its identifier is NCT04032548.

Abstract Image

蜂胶与洗必泰漱口水对牙龈炎的疗效比较--随机对照临床研究
评估和比较蜂胶漱口水与洗必泰漱口水在减少牙菌斑和牙龈炎方面的效果。我们在马来西亚 MAHSA 大学的牙科诊所对 45 名慢性牙龈炎患者进行了单中心、拉丁方形交叉、双面具随机对照临床试验。通过计算机生成的随机分配序列,45 名受试者被随机分配到三个不同的组别中(每组 15 人):A 组蜂胶漱口水;B 组洗必泰漱口水;C 组安慰剂漱口水。在基线和 21 天后,通过全口牙菌斑指数 (PI) 和牙龈指数 (GI) 评估龈上牙菌斑和牙龈炎症。研究分为三个阶段,每个阶段持续 21 天,中间有 15 天的冲洗期。A 组、B 组和 C 组在第一阶段分别使用 0.2% 蜂胶漱口水、洗必泰漱口水和安慰剂漱口水。第 22 天,再次召集受试者测量 PI 和 GI。第一阶段结束后,根据第二和第三阶段的拉丁方形设计,漱口水被交叉使用。基线时,组间比较显示 A 组、B 组和 C 组之间没有明显的统计学差异(P > 0.05)。第 21 天,单因素方差分析显示,三组的 PI(P < 0.001)和 GI(P < 0.001)差异有统计学意义。Bonferroni 事后检验显示,蜂胶漱口水和洗必泰漱口水之间的差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001),蜂胶组的牙菌斑和牙龈平均得分比洗必泰组和安慰剂组降低得更多。蜂胶漱口水明显改善了牙龈健康,减少了牙菌斑。因此,蜂胶漱口水可作为洗必泰漱口水的有效草药漱口水替代品。该试验于2019年7月25日在clinicaltrials.gov进行了回顾性注册,其标识符为NCT04032548。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles on interventions and resources that complement or replace conventional therapies, with a specific emphasis on research that explores the biological mechanisms of action, as well as their efficacy, safety, costs, patterns of use and/or implementation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信