Owens J, Addy M, Faulkner J, Lockwood C, Adair R
Division of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, Bristol, England.
J Clin Periodontol. 1997 Oct;24(10):732-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1997.tb00190.x.
The removal of plaque by toothbrushing with toothpaste is the most common form of plaque control in the developed world. However, the use of chemical adjuncts such as mouthrinses is increasing. In practice mouthrinses and toothpaste are used together, however, in many clinical trials, employed to assess mouthrinse activity, toothpaste use is suspended. This fails to measure the effect of chemical interactions which are known to occur between toothpaste ingredients and mouthrinses. The objective of this trial was to develop a methodology which would assess the adjunctive chemical plaque inhibitory action of mouthrinses, when used with toothpaste but without the indeterminate variable of toothbrushing. The study was a single blind, randomised, 7-way crossover design, based on a variation of a 4 day plaque regrowth model. The 2 x daily rinsing regimens produced increasing plaque scores in the following order: (1) water/chlorhexidine, (2) chlorhexidine/water, (3) chlorhexidine/toothpaste slurry, (4) toothpaste slurry/chlorhexidine, (5) water/toothpaste slurry, (6) toothpaste slurry/water, (7) water/water. Chlorhexidine and water or chlorhexidine and toothpaste slurry combinations produced significantly lower plaque scores than water alone. Slurry and water combinations resulted in less plaque than water alone, but differences were not significant. Toothpaste slurry and chlorhexidine produced significantly increased plaque scores compared to chlorhexidine and water. The study suggests that, outside the Hawthorne effect, chlorhexidine rinses would be less effective in reducing plaque when used with toothpaste than when used alone. The methodology could be employed as a screening tool for the evaluation of mouthrinses expected to be used as adjuncts to normal oral hygiene methods. The same could be used to optimise oral hygiene regimens which include the use of mouthrinses.
在发达国家,通过使用牙膏刷牙来清除牙菌斑是控制牙菌斑最常见的方式。然而,诸如漱口水等化学辅助用品的使用正在增加。实际上,漱口水和牙膏是一起使用的,不过,在许多用于评估漱口水活性的临床试验中,刷牙时牙膏的使用被暂停了。这无法测量牙膏成分与漱口水之间已知会发生的化学相互作用的效果。本试验的目的是开发一种方法,该方法能在不使用刷牙这个不确定变量的情况下,评估与牙膏一起使用时漱口水对牙菌斑的辅助化学抑制作用。该研究采用单盲、随机、七向交叉设计,基于四天牙菌斑再生长模型的一种变体。每天两次的漱口方案产生的牙菌斑分数按以下顺序递增:(1) 水/氯己定,(2) 氯己定/水,(3) 氯己定/牙膏糊剂,(4) 牙膏糊剂/氯己定,(5) 水/牙膏糊剂,(6) 牙膏糊剂/水,(7) 水/水。氯己定与水或氯己定与牙膏糊剂的组合产生的牙菌斑分数显著低于单独用水。糊剂与水的组合导致的牙菌斑比单独用水少,但差异不显著。与氯己定和水相比,牙膏糊剂和氯己定产生的牙菌斑分数显著增加。该研究表明,在霍桑效应之外,氯己定漱口水与牙膏一起使用时在减少牙菌斑方面的效果不如单独使用时。该方法可作为一种筛选工具,用于评估预期用作正常口腔卫生方法辅助用品的漱口水。同样可用于优化包括使用漱口水的口腔卫生方案。