Efficacy of 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride mouthwash as an adjunct to toothbrushing compared with 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash in reducing dental plaque and gingival inflammation: A randomized control trial.
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to compare the efficacy and side effects of alcohol-free 0.05% CPC mouthwash, 0.12% CHX mouthwash, and a placebo in reducing plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation when used as an adjunct to toothbrushing.
Results Summary
After 6 weeks, both CPC and CHX mouthwashes significantly reduced plaque and gingivitis compared to placebo, with no significant difference between them. CPC caused fewer side effects (taste alteration, numbness) than CHX, and staining scores were lower but not significantly different.
Population
219 university students
Effective Dosage
0.05% CPC mouthwash and 0.12% CHX mouthwash (frequency not specified)
Duration
6 weeks
Interactions
None mentioned
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash as an adjunct to twice-daily toothbrushing | decrease | plaque accumulation | 219 university students | - | reducing | #1 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash as an adjunct to twice-daily toothbrushing | decrease | gingival inflammation | 219 university students | - | reducing | #2 |
0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash | decrease | plaque accumulation | 219 university students | - | reducing | #3 |
0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash | decrease | gingival inflammation | 219 university students | - | reducing | #4 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash | decrease | plaque scores | participants | - | were found to be significantly different | #5 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash | decrease | gingivitis scores | participants | - | were found to be significantly different | #6 |
0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash | decrease | plaque scores | participants | - | were found to be significantly different | #7 |
0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash | decrease | gingivitis scores | participants | - | were found to be significantly different | #8 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash | no change | plaque scores | - | - | was no significant difference | #9 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash | no change | gingivitis scores | - | - | was no significant difference | #10 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash | decrease | staining scores | participants in the CPC group | - | were lower | #11 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash | no change | staining scores | - | - | the difference was not significant | #12 |
0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash | increase | taste alteration | participants in the CHX group | - | were more common | #13 |
0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash | increase | numbness | participants in the CHX group | - | were more common | #14 |
0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash | no change | perception of a burning sensation | - | - | No significant difference | #15 |
alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash | no change | perception of a burning sensation | - | - | No significant difference | #16 |
OBJECTIVES: This study determined the efficacy of alcohol-free 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwash as an adjunct to twice-daily toothbrushing in comparison with 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) mouthwash and a placebo in reducing plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation. The side effects of the mouthwashes were also determined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A double-blind, parallel, randomized control trial was conducted with 219 university students who were divided into three trial groups using block randomization: CPC, CHX and placebo groups. Clinical oral examinations to assess dental plaque accumulation (modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index), gingival health (Löe and Silness Gingival Index) and tooth staining (modified Lobene Stain Index) were performed at baseline and at 6 weeks. RESULTS: Plaque and gingivitis scores were not significantly different among participants at baseline. After 6 weeks, plaque and gingivitis scores between the CPC and placebo groups and between the CHX and placebo groups were found to be significantly different. However, there was no significant difference between the CPC and CHX groups. The staining scores of participants in the CPC group were lower than those in the CHX group, but the difference was not significant. Taste alteration and numbness were more common among participants in the CHX group than in the CPC group. No significant difference in the perception of a burning sensation was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The 0.05% CPC mouthwash was as efficient as 0.12% CHX mouthwash in reducing dental plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation with fewer side effects, supporting its use as an adjunct to toothbrushing.