Sharma Naresh C, Charles Christine H, Qaqish Jimmy G, Galustians H Jack, Zhao Qian, Kumar Lori D
BioSci Research Canada Ltd, Mississauga, Ontario.
Am J Dent. 2002 Dec;15(6):351-5.
To compare the effectiveness of rinsing with an essential oil-containing antimicrobial mouthrinse with that of dental floss in reducing interproximal gingivitis and plaque in an unsupervised 6-month clinical trial designed in accordance with ADA Acceptance Program Guidelines.
319 qualifying subjects, aged 18-63, were randomized into one of three groups: essential oil mouthrinse (Listerine Antiseptic); dental floss (Reach Dental Floss); or a negative control rinse. At baseline, subjects received a complete oral soft tissue examination and scoring of the Modified Gingival Index (MGI), modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (PI), and bleeding index (BI). Following a complete dental prophylaxis and receiving flossing or rinsing instructions, subjects started on their respective regimen. They continued on their assigned regimen unsupervised at home, in addition to toothbrushing, and were reexamined at 3 and 6 months. The treatment groups were compared with respect to baseline demographic and clinical variables. The primary efficacy variables were mean interproximal MGI and PI at 6 months. Intergroup differences at 3 and 6 months were tested using a one-way analysis of covariance model with treatment as a factor and the respective baseline value as the covariate. In addition, the essential oil mouthrinse was compared to floss for interproximal gingivitis reduction using "at least as good as" statistical criteria.
301 subjects were considered evaluable. There were no statistically significant differences among the 3 groups at baseline, with the exception of the essential oil mouthrinse group having significantly fewer AfroAmerican subjects than the other two groups. For the interproximal MGI, the essential oil mouthrinse and flossing were both significantly more effective than the negative control (P < 0.001) at 3 and 6 months. The essential oil mouthrinse was shown to be "at least as good as" dental floss for the control of interproximal gingivitis. For the interproximal PI, the essential oil mouthrinse was significantly more effective than the negative control at 3 and 6 months (P < 0.001) while flossing was significantly more effective than the negative control at 3 months (P < 0.05) but not at 6 months. The essential oil mouthrinse was significantly more effective than floss (P < 0.001) at both these time periods.
在一项按照美国牙科协会认可计划指南设计的为期6个月的非监督性临床试验中,比较使用含精油的抗菌漱口水与牙线在减少邻面牙龈炎和牙菌斑方面的效果。
319名年龄在18 - 63岁的合格受试者被随机分为三组之一:精油漱口水组(李施德林抗菌漱口水);牙线组(瑞琪牙线);或阴性对照漱口水组。在基线时,对受试者进行全面的口腔软组织检查,并对改良牙龈指数(MGI)、改良奎格利 - 海因菌斑指数(PI)和出血指数(BI)进行评分。在完成全面的牙齿预防治疗并接受牙线使用或漱口水使用指导后,受试者开始各自的治疗方案。他们除了刷牙外,在家中在无监督的情况下继续其指定的治疗方案,并在3个月和6个月时接受复查。对治疗组的基线人口统计学和临床变量进行比较。主要疗效变量为6个月时的平均邻面MGI和PI。使用以治疗为因素、各自基线值为协变量的单因素协方差模型对3个月和6个月时的组间差异进行检验。此外,使用“至少与……一样好”的统计标准,比较精油漱口水与牙线在减少邻面牙龈炎方面的效果。
301名受试者被认为可进行评估。在基线时,三组之间没有统计学上的显著差异,但精油漱口水组的非裔美国受试者明显少于其他两组。对于邻面MGI,在3个月和6个月时,精油漱口水和使用牙线都比阴性对照显著更有效(P < 0.001)。精油漱口水在控制邻面牙龈炎方面被证明“至少与牙线一样好”。对于邻面PI,在3个月和6个月时,精油漱口水比阴性对照显著更有效(P < 0.001),而使用牙线在3个月时比阴性对照显著更有效(P < 0.05),但在6个月时并非如此。在这两个时间段,精油漱口水都比牙线显著更有效(P < 0.001)。