Skip to content

Efficacy of Eco-Friendly Toothpaste Tablets Versus Conventional Toothpaste Using PI and GI Index

Efficacy of Eco-Friendly Toothpaste Tablets Versus Conventional Toothpaste Using PI and GI Index

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05805865
Enrollment
40
Registered
2023-04-10
Start date
2023-01-03
Completion date
2023-01-23
Last updated
2025-02-21

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

Conditions

Gingival Inflammation

Keywords

Gingival Index, Plaque Index, Dentifrice, Toothpaste Tablets, Consumer Satisfaction

Brief summary

Objectives: To assess the change in gingival index (GI) and plaque index (PI) when comparing the use of toothpaste tablets to conventional toothpaste. Methods: 40 participants were randomized into two groups: Colgate's toothpaste tablets (T) and Colgate's Cavity Protection toothpaste (C). Both groups utilized their assigned dentifrice for 2 weeks. A pre and post-assessment measured the GI and PI index. A questionnaire on the use of the product was distributed.

Interventions

Colgate Anywhere Toothpaste Tablets

Colgate Cavity Protection

Sponsors

Loma Linda University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)

Masking description

Investigator blinded to group

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

1. Subjects are 18 years or older; 2. Subjects who will comply with study protocol; 3. Subjects who can read and understand the consent form; 4. Subjects available during the study period; 5. Subjects have more than 20 teeth.

Exclusion criteria

1. Subjects who are pregnant and/or nursing; 2. Subjects under the age of 18.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Plaque Index Score at BaselineChange between baseline at visit 1 and visit 2, two weeks post baseline.Plaque was scored according to the Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index. Each tooth was divided into six surfaces, three facial and three lingual, as follows: 1) mesio-facial; 2) mid-facial; 3) disto-facial; 4) mesio-lingual; 5) mid-lingual; and 6) disto-lingual. Teeth included in the scoring were: #3, 7, 12, 19, 23, 28. Plaque was disclosed and scored on each tooth surface according to the following criteria: 0: No plaque. 1. Separate flecks of plaque at the cervical margin. 2. A thin, continuous band of plaque (up to 1 mm) at the cer- vical margin. 3. A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the side of the crown of the tooth. 4. Plaque covering at least 1/3, but less than 2/3 of the side of the crown of the tooth. 5. Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the side of the crown of the tooth. Subject-wise scores were determined by averaging the values obtained over all scorable surfaces in the mouth.
Gingival Index Score at BaselineChange between baseline at visit 1 and visit 2, two weeks post baseline.Gingivitis was scored according to the Löe-Silness Gingival Index. Each tooth was divided into six surfaces, three facial and three lingual, as follows: 1) mesio-facial; 2) mid-facial; 3) disto-facial; 4) mesio-lingual; 5) mid-lingual; and 6) disto-lingual. Teeth included in the scoring were: #3, 7, 12, 19, 23, 28. The gingiva adjacent to each tooth surface was scored as follows: 0 = Absence of inflammation. 1. = Mild inflammation-slight change in color and little change in texture. 2. = Moderate inflammation-moderate glazing, redness, edema, and hypertrophy. 3. = Severe inflammation-marked redness and hypertrophy. Tendency for spontaneous bleeding. Subject-wise scores were determined by averaging the values obtained over all scorable surfaces in the mouth.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Subject Perception of Product UseVisit 2 two weeks post study enrollmentThis is a composite measurement based on questionnaire response. Subjects will answer 7 questions related to cleanliness, flavor, ease of use, eco-friendliness, willingness to switch, satisfaction, texture. This is measured on a Likert Scale from 1-4. 1 represents strongly agree with overall product satisfaction. 4 represents strongly disagree with overall product satisfaction.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Toothpaste Tablet
Subjects are instructed to use one toothpaste tablet for brushing. Brushing is recommended twice daily for two minutes. Toothpaste Tablet: Colgate Anywhere Toothpaste Tablets
20
Conventional Toothpaste
Subjects are instructed to use the toothpaste for brushing. Brushing is recommended twice daily for two minutes. Conventional Toothpaste: Colgate Cavity Protection
20
Total40

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicConventional ToothpasteTotalToothpaste Tablet
Age, Continuous25.35 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.15
25.15 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.12
24.95 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.2
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
20 participants40 participants20 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
12 Participants26 Participants14 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
8 Participants14 Participants6 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 200 / 20
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 200 / 20
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 200 / 20

Outcome results

Primary

Gingival Index Score at Baseline

Gingivitis was scored according to the Löe-Silness Gingival Index. Each tooth was divided into six surfaces, three facial and three lingual, as follows: 1) mesio-facial; 2) mid-facial; 3) disto-facial; 4) mesio-lingual; 5) mid-lingual; and 6) disto-lingual. Teeth included in the scoring were: #3, 7, 12, 19, 23, 28. The gingiva adjacent to each tooth surface was scored as follows: 0 = Absence of inflammation. 1. = Mild inflammation-slight change in color and little change in texture. 2. = Moderate inflammation-moderate glazing, redness, edema, and hypertrophy. 3. = Severe inflammation-marked redness and hypertrophy. Tendency for spontaneous bleeding. Subject-wise scores were determined by averaging the values obtained over all scorable surfaces in the mouth.

Time frame: Change between baseline at visit 1 and visit 2, two weeks post baseline.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Toothpaste TabletGingival Index Score at Baseline1.35 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.26
Conventional ToothpasteGingival Index Score at Baseline1.37 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.24
Primary

Plaque Index Score at Baseline

Plaque was scored according to the Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index. Each tooth was divided into six surfaces, three facial and three lingual, as follows: 1) mesio-facial; 2) mid-facial; 3) disto-facial; 4) mesio-lingual; 5) mid-lingual; and 6) disto-lingual. Teeth included in the scoring were: #3, 7, 12, 19, 23, 28. Plaque was disclosed and scored on each tooth surface according to the following criteria: 0: No plaque. 1. Separate flecks of plaque at the cervical margin. 2. A thin, continuous band of plaque (up to 1 mm) at the cer- vical margin. 3. A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the side of the crown of the tooth. 4. Plaque covering at least 1/3, but less than 2/3 of the side of the crown of the tooth. 5. Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the side of the crown of the tooth. Subject-wise scores were determined by averaging the values obtained over all scorable surfaces in the mouth.

Time frame: Change between baseline at visit 1 and visit 2, two weeks post baseline.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Toothpaste TabletPlaque Index Score at Baseline2.80 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.58
Conventional ToothpastePlaque Index Score at Baseline2.78 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.46
Secondary

Subject Perception of Product Use

This is a composite measurement based on questionnaire response. Subjects will answer 7 questions related to cleanliness, flavor, ease of use, eco-friendliness, willingness to switch, satisfaction, texture. This is measured on a Likert Scale from 1-4. 1 represents strongly agree with overall product satisfaction. 4 represents strongly disagree with overall product satisfaction.

Time frame: Visit 2 two weeks post study enrollment

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Toothpaste TabletSubject Perception of Product Use2.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.4
Conventional ToothpasteSubject Perception of Product Use1.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.4

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