4.4 Article

The effectiveness of a preprocedural mouthrinse containing cetylpyridinium chloride in reducing bacteria in the dental office

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION
卷 141, 期 4, 页码 415-422

出版社

AMER DENTAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0193

关键词

Infection control; antimicrobial mouthrinse; oral bacteria

资金

  1. Colgate-Palmolive, Sao Paulo

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. During oral procedures, microorganisms from the oral cavity may contaminate nearby surfaces. The authors evaluated the efficacy of a commercial preprocedural mouthrinse containing 0.05 percent cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) in reducing the levels and composition of viable bacteria in oral spatter. Methods. The authors randomly assigned 60 participants receiving oral prophylaxis with an ultrasonic scaler to one of four groups: a preprocedural rinse solution containing 0.05 percent CPC, 0.12 percent chlorhexidine (CHX) or water, or no rinsing. Airborne microorganisms were collected on blood agar plates. The composition of the spatter was analyzed for 39 oral bacterial species by means of checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization. Results. CPC and CHX were equally effective in lowering the levels of spatter bacteria and performed better than water and no rinsing (P < .05, Kruskal-Wallis test). The composition of the spatter from the control groups showed higher proportions (P < .05, Kruskal-Wallis test) of Fusobacterium species and lower proportions of Capnocytophaga species when compared with the spatter from the CPC and CHX groups. Conclusion. A commercial mouthrinse containing 0.05 percent CPC when used as a preprocedural mouthrinse was equally effective as CHX in reducing the levels of spatter bacteria generated during ultrasonic scaling. Clinical Implications. Owing to its strong antibacterial effect and the fact that it has fewer side effects than CHX, a solution containing 0.05 percent CPC may be a good alternative to that containing 0.12 CHX as a preprocedural mouthrinse used to help decrease the level of contamination in spatter.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据