Suppr超能文献

两种抗牙龈炎漱口水的对比临床试验

Comparative clinical trial of two antigingivitis mouthrinses.

作者信息

Witt Jon J, Walters Patricia, Bsoul Samer, Gibb Roger, Dunavent John, Putt Mark

机构信息

The Procter and Gamble Company, Health Care Research Center, Mason, Ohio 45040-9462, USA.

出版信息

Am J Dent. 2005 Jul;18 Spec No:15A-17A.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the safety and the antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of two oral rinses.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, parallel groups, single-center study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a high bioavailable, alcohol-free 0.07% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) rinse (Crest Pro-Health Rinse) and a positive control rinse containing essential oils (EO) and 21.6% ethyl alcohol (Cool Mint Listerine). Seventy-eight healthy adults were enrolled in a modified experimental gingivitis clinical trial. Four weeks before the baseline visit, subjects received a prophylaxis and were instructed to brush twice daily in a manner to approach optimum gingival health. At the end of the 4-week period, subjects were randomly assigned to treatment and instructed to use 20 ml of their assigned product for 30 seconds after brushing twice daily during a 21-day treatment phase. Plaque removal by brushing was prevented during the treatment phase for one mandibular quadrant (experimental gingivitis region) by means of a specially-manufactured tooth shield. Safety and efficacy measurements were obtained at baseline and at the end-of-treatment using the Modified Gingival Index (MGI), Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), and Modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (MQH). At all visits, an oral soft tissue examination was performed for each subject. The efficacy data obtained in the experimental gingivitis region were analyzed with analysis of covariance.

RESULTS

Seventy-five subjects completed the study and were included in the data analyses. No statistically significant differences were detected between the two treatment groups for MGI, GBI or MQH measures. Results were similar for shielded interproximal sites. Both treatments were well-tolerated.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This randomized, controlled comparative clinical trial demonstrated that rinsing twice daily with the experimental alcohol-free 0.07% CPC rinse provides antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy similar to that of the positive control EO rinse, a recognized antiplaque and antigingivitis mouthrinse that contains alcohol.

摘要

目的

比较两种口腔含漱液的安全性以及抗牙菌斑和抗牙龈炎功效。

方法

开展了一项随机、双盲、平行组、单中心研究,以评估高生物利用度、不含酒精的0.07%西吡氯铵(CPC)含漱液(佳洁士全优护理含漱液)和含精油(EO)及21.6%乙醇的阳性对照含漱液(劲爽薄荷味李施德林)的安全性和功效。78名健康成年人参与了一项改良的实验性牙龈炎临床试验。在基线访视前四周,受试者接受了洁治,并被指导每天以接近最佳牙龈健康的方式刷牙两次。在4周期间结束时,受试者被随机分配接受治疗,并被指导在21天的治疗阶段中,每天刷牙两次后使用20毫升指定产品30秒。在治疗阶段,通过特制的牙托防止在下颌一个象限(实验性牙龈炎区域)刷牙去除牙菌斑。在基线和治疗结束时,使用改良牙龈指数(MGI)、牙龈出血指数(GBI)和改良的奎格利-海因菌斑指数(MQH)进行安全性和功效测量。在所有访视中,对每位受试者进行口腔软组织检查。在实验性牙龈炎区域获得的功效数据采用协方差分析。

结果

75名受试者完成了研究并纳入数据分析。在MGI、GBI或MQH测量方面,两个治疗组之间未检测到统计学上的显著差异。在有牙托的邻面部位结果相似。两种治疗耐受性良好。

临床意义

这项随机对照比较临床试验表明,每天用不含酒精的0.07% CPC实验性含漱液漱口两次,其抗牙菌斑和抗牙龈炎功效与阳性对照EO含漱液相似,后者是一种公认的含酒精的抗牙菌斑和抗牙龈炎漱口水。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验