Skip to content

Safety and Efficacy Evaluation of Mouth Wash(Glister Mouth Wash): Pilot Study

Safety and Efficacy Evaluation of Mouth Wash(Glister Mouth Wash): Pilot Study

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05644236
Enrollment
86
Registered
2022-12-09
Start date
2021-09-27
Completion date
2021-12-31
Last updated
2022-12-09

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Oral Hygiene, Gingival Index, Cetylpyridinium Chloride

Keywords

mouthwash, cetylpyridinium chloride, oral hygiene

Brief summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to examine the efficacy of mouthwash containing 0.045% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) on oral health-related parameters\] in \[healthy conditions\]. The main question\[s\] it aims to answer are: * \[ Trial 1: effect of immediate-use mouthwash containing CPC vs. non-CPC\] * \[Trial 2: effect of concentrated-use mouthwash containing CPC vs. non-CPC\] Participants will be treated by mouth wash 3 times a day for 4-weeks If there is a comparison group: Researchers will compare CPC containing mouthwash group and sham mouthwash groups treated with non CPC-containing mouthwash to see the effect of CPC on plaque index, mouth smell, gingival index and tongue coating index.

Detailed description

2.1. Participants In all, 100 subjects were recruited to this clinical study according to the following inclusion criteria: i) Healthy male or female; ii) presence of \>20 existing teeth (the number of remaining teeth); iii) no severe pathological soft tissue conditions, periodontitis, or extensive dental plaque; iv) Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (PI) of over 1.5 and Loe & Silness Gingival Index (GI) of over 1.5; vi) able to perform oral care/hygiene tasks on his/her own; vii) voluntary participation; and viii) willing to comply with the test protocol. Participants were excluded if they had any kind of visible or known disease requiring prophylactic antibiotic use. 2.2. Study design This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical trial, and the intervention was gargling with the OR twice daily. The participants were randomly divided into four groups: control 1 (C1) (n=19), immediate-use CPC (IUC) (n=16), control 2 (C2) (n=19), and concentrated-use CPC (CUC) groups (n=19). Both C1 and C2 received ORs without CPC, whereas the experimental groups IUC and CUC received CPC ORs of different formulations (Amway Korea Ltd., Seoul, Republic of Korea). Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are analyzed according to the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle and the per-protocol (PP) approach. ITT aims to assess the experimental design and PP analysis investigates the effect of receiving an assigned treatment. The participants underwent dental scaling before starting the intervention. Ethical approval was granted by the Institutional Research Ethics Review Board, Yonsei University, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital (IRBN CR321058) 2.3. Intervention After obtaining baseline information and randomizing the participants into two groups, dental scaling was performed, followed by clinical treatment. The participants were instructed to gargle twice daily for 7 days. All the participants were instructed not to eat or drink anything for at least 4 hours before the experiment. Oral hygiene, such as gargling and tooth brushing, was prohibited for 8 hours before the visit. 2.4. Measurment of H2S and methyl mercaptan, Quigley-Hein plaque index, Gingival Index,Tongue Coating Index.

Interventions

After obtaining baseline information and randomizing the participants into two groups, dental scaling was performed, followed by clinical treatment. The participants were instructed to gargle twice daily for 7 days. All the participants were instructed not to eat or drink anything for at least 4 hours before the experiment. Oral hygiene, such as gargling and tooth brushing, was prohibited for 8 hrs before the visit.

Sponsors

Wonju Severance Christian Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
SCREENING
Masking
NONE

Masking description

Mouthwah solution was provided by sponsor who packed experimental and control solution in the bottle. Investigator and participants did not know the contents during treatment period.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Healthy male or female; * presence of \>20 existing teeth (the number of remaining teeth); * no severe pathological soft tissue conditions, periodontitis, or extensive dental plaque; * Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (PI) of over 1.5 and Loe & Silness Gingival Index (GI) of over 1.5; • able to perform oral care/hygiene tasks on his/her own; * voluntary participation; and viii) willing to comply with the test protocol.

Exclusion criteria

* They excluded if they had any kind of visible or known disease requiring prophylactic antibiotic use.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
hydrogen sulfide(H2S) and methyl mercaptan(CH3SH)4 weeksin the pretreatment versus post-treatment comparisons of the groups, levels of H2S (p \< 0.01) and CH3SH (p \< 0.01) were reduced significantly in cpc-containing mouthwash group (immediate-use and concentrated-use mouthwash) comparing non-CPC containing sham mouthwash.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quigley-Hein plaque index4 weeksthe PI had decreased in all groups (Figure 3A). However, the IUC group showed significant antiplaque effects compared with the C1 group (p \< 0.05). Improvement in periodontal health was seen 14 days after treatment, which was not observed in the CUC group (Figure 3B). Since OR without CPC also improved periodontal health, we further examined the group on day 28 of the trial. In addition, after 28 days, the CUC group showed antiplaque effects (p \< 0.05). Overall, the IUC showed superior antiplaque activity and faster periodontal health-promoting effects than the CUC and control formulations.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Gingival index4 weeksthe highest increase in gingival health was observed 28 days after IUC administration (p \< 0.05) (Figure 4A). Similar to the results for the PI, we did not observe significant changes in the gingival health of the C1 and C2 groups. As expected, gingival health improved significantly in the CUC group compared to in the C2 group, which was observed on study days 14 and 28 (Figure 4B).

Countries

South Korea

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026