Quantitative analysis of the effects of brushing, flossing, and mouthrinsing on supragingival and subgingival plaque microbiota: 12-week clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Translational microbiome research using next-generation DNA sequencing is challenging due to the semi-qualitative nature of relative abundance data. A novel method for quantitative analysis was applied in this 12-week clinical trial to understand the mechanical vs. chemotherapeutic actions of brushing, flossing, and mouthrinsing against the supragingival dental plaque microbiome. Enumeration of viable bacteria using vPCR was also applied on supragingival plaque for validation and on subgingival plaque to evaluate interventional effects below the gingival margin. METHODS: Subjects with gingivitis were enrolled in a single center, examiner-blind, virtually supervised, parallel group controlled clinical trial. Subjects with gingivitis were randomized into brushing only (B); brushing and flossing (BF); brushing and rinsing with Listerine® Cool Mint® Antiseptic (BA); brushing and rinsing with Listerine® Cool Mint® Zero (BZ); or brushing, flossing, and rinsing with Listerine® Cool Mint® Zero (BFZ). All subjects brushed twice daily for 1 min with a sodium monofluorophosphate toothpaste and a soft-bristled toothbrush. Subjects who flossed used unflavored waxed dental floss once daily. Subjects assigned to mouthrinses rinsed twice daily. Plaque specimens were collected at the baseline visit and after 4 and 12 weeks of intervention. Bacterial cell number quantification was achieved by adding reference amounts of DNA controls to plaque samples prior to DNA extraction, followed by shallow shotgun metagenome sequencing. RESULTS: 286 subjects completed the trial. The metagenomic data for supragingival plaque showed significant reductions in Shannon-Weaver diversity, species richness, and total and categorical bacterial abundances (commensal, gingivitis, and malodor) after 4 and 12 weeks for the BA, BZ, and BFZ groups compared to the B group, while no significant differences were observed between the B and BF groups. Supragingival plaque vPCR further validated these results, and subgingival plaque vPCR demonstrated significant efficacy for the BFZ intervention only. CONCLUSIONS: This publication reports on a successful application of a quantitative method of microbiome analysis in a clinical trial demonstrating the sustained and superior efficacy of essential oil mouthrinses at controlling dental plaque compared to mechanical methods. The quantitative microbiological data in this trial also reinforce the safety and mechanism of action of EO mouthrinses against plaque microbial ecology and highlights the importance of elevating EO mouthrinsing as an integral part of an oral hygiene regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 31/10/2022. The registration number is NCT05600231.

Quantitative analysis of the effects of essential oil mouthrinses on clinical plaque microbiome: a parallel-group, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The rich diversity of microorganisms in the oral cavity plays an important role in the maintenance of oral health and development of detrimental oral health conditions. Beyond commonly used qualitative microbiome metrics, such as relative proportions or diversity, both the species-level identification and quantification of bacteria are key to understanding clinical disease associations. This study reports the first-time application of an absolute quantitative microbiome analysis using spiked DNA standards and shotgun metagenome sequencing to assess the efficacy and safety of product intervention on dental plaque microbiome. METHODS: In this parallel-group, randomized clinical trial, essential oil mouthrinses, including LISTERINE® Cool Mint Antiseptic (LCM), an alcohol-containing prototype mouthrinse (ACPM), and an alcohol-free prototype mouthrinse (AFPM), were compared against a hydroalcohol control rinse on clinical parameters and the oral microbiome of subjects with moderate gingivitis. To enable a sensitive and clinically meaningful measure of bacterial abundances, species were categorized according to their associations with oral conditions based on published literature and quantified using known amounts of spiked DNA standards. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed that both LCM and ACPM shifted the dysbiotic microbiome composition of subjects with gingivitis to a healthier state after 4 weeks of twice-daily use, resembling the composition of subjects with clinically healthy oral conditions recruited for observational reference comparison at baseline. The essential oil-containing mouthrinses evaluated in this study showed statistically significant reductions in clinical gingivitis and plaque measurements when compared to the hydroalcohol control rinse after 6 weeks of use. CONCLUSIONS: By establishing a novel quantitative method for microbiome analysis, this study sheds light on the mechanisms of LCM mouthrinse efficacy on oral microbial ecology, demonstrating that repeated usage non-selectively resets a gingivitis-like oral microbiome toward that of a healthy oral cavity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 10/06/2021. The registration number is NCT04921371.

Efficacy of flossing and mouth rinsing regimens on plaque and gingivitis: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effects of combinations of mechanical (brushing and flossing) and chemotherapeutic regimens which included essential oils (EO) non-alcohol and alcohol-containing mouthrinses compared to brushing only in the prevention and reduction of plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding. METHODS: This was a randomized, virtually supervised, examiner blind, controlled clinical trial. Following informed consent and screening, subjects (N = 270) with gingivitis were randomly assigned to one of the following regimens: (1) Brush Only (B, n = 54); (2) Brush/Rinse (EO alcohol-containing mouthrinse) (BA, n = 54); (3) Brush/Rinse (EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse) (BZ, n = 54); (4) Brush/Floss (BF, n = 54); (5) Brush/Floss/Rinse (EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse) (BFZ, n = 54). Unflavored waxed dental floss (REACH unflavored waxed dental floss), and fluoridated toothpaste (Colgate Cavity Protection) were used. Examinations included oral hard and soft tissue, plaque, gingivitis, gingival bleeding, probing depth and bleeding on probing. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, both BA and BZ and the BFZ group were superior in reducing interproximal plaque (30.8%, 18.2%, 16.0%, respectively), gingivitis (39.0%, 36.9%, 36.1%, respectively), and bleeding (67.8%, 73.6%, 79.8%, respectively) compared to B. The BF group did not provide significant reductions in interproximal plaque but did reduce interproximal gingivitis (5.1%, p = 0.041) at Week 4 and bleeding at Weeks 4 and 12 (34.6%, 31.4%, p < 0.001 respectively) compared to B. The BFZ group did not significantly reduce interproximal plaque, gingivitis or bleeding compared to BZ. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the addition of EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse to the manual toothbrushing and flossing regimen further reduces plaque, gingivitis and bleeding showing that addition of EO mouthrinses (alcohol or non-alcohol containing) to the oral hygiene regimen provides sustained reductions in plaque to help maintain gingival health after a dental prophylaxis. Dental professional recommendation of the addition of an EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse to daily oral hygiene routines of brushing or brushing and flossing should be considered to aid supragingival plaque control and improve gingivitis prevention. STUDY REGISTRY NUMBER: NCT05600231.

Comparative Effectiveness of Toothbrushing, Flossing and Mouthrinse Regimens on Plaque and Gingivitis: A 12-week virtually supervised clinical trial.

Purpose:Various mechanical and chemotherapeutic methods are used to control dental plaque accumulation and prevent or reduce gingivitis. The purpose of this 12-week clinical trial was to investigate the effects of various combinations of supervised mechanical and chemotherapeutic regimens on the prevention and reduction of plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding.Methods:Volunteers presenting with some evidence of gingivitis and no severe periodontitis were randomized into four groups: brush only (BO); brush/rinse (BR); brush/floss (BF); brush/floss/rinse (BFR) for this examiner-blinded clinical trial. Toothbrush, toothpaste, floss and a mouthrinse containing a fixed combination of four essential oils (EO) and training/instructions were provided to participants as per their assigned group. Participants performed their regimen at home, under virtual supervision, once each weekday; the second daily and weekend uses were unsupervised. Assessments included oral hard and soft tissue, plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding (weeks 4, 12); probing depth and bleeding on probing (week 12).Results:Of 213 enrolled participants, 209 completed the study. After 12 weeks, plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding were significantly reduced in groups BR (35.8%, 50.8%, and 71.0% respectively, p<0.001) and BFR (32.8%, 54.1%, and 78.2% respectively, p<0.001) compared to BO. After 12 weeks, gingivitis and gingival bleeding were significantly reduced in the BF group (9.2%, p=0.013 and 17.5%, p=0.003, respectively), however there were no significant reductions in plaque in the BF group as compared to the BO group (p=0.935).Conclusions:Oral care regimens that included a mouthrinse containing a fixed combination of four EOs (BR and BFR), demonstrated statistically significantly reduced plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding as compared to BO and BF after 12 weeks. The BF regimen statistically significantly reduced gingivitis and gingival bleeding but did not statistically significantly reduce plaque compared to BO after 12 weeks.

Role of Manual Dexterity on Mechanical and Chemotherapeutic Oral Hygiene Regimens.

Purpose:Effective use of mechanical plaque control devices can depend on individual manual dexterity levels. The purpose of this component of a 12-week, virtually-supervised clinical trial was to investigate the role of manual dexterity on clinical outcomes for gingivitis, as measured by the relationship between manual dexterity scores on the Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT) and the effects of various mechanical and chemotherapeutic oral hygiene regimens.Methods:This was a single-center, examiner blinded, randomized, four-treatment arm, parallel group, 12-week plaque and gingivitis study. At baseline, healthy adult volunteers with evidence of gingivitis were assessed for manual dexterity and were then examined for plaque, gingivitis and bleeding. After a dental prophylaxis, participants were randomized into four treatment groups: brush only (BO); brush/rinse (BR); brush/floss (BF); and brush/floss/rinse (BFR). The flossing groups received instruction in flossing. The PPT was used to assess manual dexterity and was performed by a licensed occupational therapist. Virtual supervision was required once each weekday and the oral hygiene regimen was unsupervised on evenings and weekends.Results:Of the 213 subjects enrolled, 209 completed the trial. Improvements from baseline to week 12 in interproximal percent nonbleeding healthy sites (Expanded Bleeding Index (EBI)=0 and Modified Gingival Index (MGI)=0 or 1) were dependent on the participant's dexterity score. Participants with the lowest dexterity scores (9 or lower) in the BFR treatment group demonstrated the greatest improvement interproximally based on the indices (EBI and MGI). In comparison, the BF test group subjects with dexterity scores 9 or lower had limited change in improvement interproximally. There was a direct correlation between flossing effectiveness and dexterity scores.Conclusions:Less manual dexterity can limit dental flossing effectiveness. Flossing is a difficult daily task that requires functional bilateral dexterity to be perform correctly. Individuals with lower levels of manual dexterity were shown to benefit from the addition of an essential oil mouthrinse to a regimen of toothbrushing and flossing in this clinical trial. The addition of an essential oil mouthrinse improved interproximal gingival health and mitigated the manual dexterity variable.

Efficacy of Flossing and Mouthrinsing Regimens on Plaque and Gingivitis: A randomized clinical trial.

Purpose:Flossing is a well-known component of daily recommended oral care regimens, but patients often find it challenging to perform effectively on a regular basis. The purpose of this 12-week supervised clinical trial was to investigate the effects of twice daily rinsing with a mouthrinse containing a fixed combination of four essential oils (4EO) and supervised daily dental flossing regimens as compared to a negative control 5% hydroalcohol rinse (NC) on the prevention and reduction of plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding.Methods:Volunteer participants who met the inclusion criteria were randomized into the following groups for the 12- week trial: 1) NC; 2) mouthrinse containing 4EO; 3) professional flossing performed by a dental hygienist (FBH); 4) supervised self-flossing (FUS). All participants received a professional dental prophylaxis prior to beginning the trial. On weekday mornings, all participants brushed on site. After brushing, the rinse groups used their products under supervision, and the floss groups had their teeth flossed by a dental hygienist or self-flossed under supervision. Participants performed their assigned regimen in the evenings and the twice-daily weekend use at home. Each individual assessment of oral hard and soft tissue, plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding at weeks 4 and 12, probing depth and bleeding on probing at week 12 was made by the same calibrated examiner.Results:Of 156 randomized participants, 149 completed the trial. Use of the 4EO mouthrinse statistically significantly reduced plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding on probing after 12 weeks as compared to the NC rinse. Both flossing interventions statistically significantly reduced interproximal gingivitis and gingival bleeding at 12 weeks compared to the NC rinse; neither flossing intervention significantly reduced interproximal plaque after 12 weeks compared to the NC rinse.Conclusions:Rinsing with a 4EO mouthrinse statistically significantly improved all oral health outcome measures at all time points compared to a NC rinse in this 12-week clinical trial. While professional and supervised flossing improved gingival health compared to use of the NC rinse, statistically significant plaque reduction with dental flossing was not attained at the end of the 12-week trial.

Habits, Practices and Beliefs Regarding Floss and Mouthrinse among Habitual and Non-Habitual Users.

Purpose:The purpose of this survey was to investigate how flossing and rinsing behaviors impact individual beliefs about oral disease risk, the efficacy of floss and mouthrinse, and the perceived benefits and barriers of floss and mouthrinse.Methods:Participants in this required component of a 12-week plaque and gingivitis randomized clinical trial on flossing and rinsing regimens completed a paper questionnaire prior to randomization and baseline/screening measurements.Results:All of the clinical trial participants (n=213) completed the questionnaire. Respondents were grouped as habitual or non-habitual users of floss or mouthrinse if the product was used at least once daily; 16% (n=34) were habitual users of floss and 17% (n=36) were habitual users of mouthrinse. Perceived barriers included fear of gingival bleeding and pain, forgetting, and not including flossing or rinsing as part of the daily oral care routine. Non-habitual users were less likely to believe in the intangible benefits of flossing or rinsing and much more likely to perceive barriers to using floss or mouthrinse. Risk perception of developing oral disease was not shown to predict product usage. Respondents viewed their risk of developing gingivitis as relatively low despite this diagnosis being confirmed clinically among the participants.Conclusions:While respondents strongly believed that brushing, flossing, and mouthrinse use carry unique benefits and that combining all three methods would be optimal, these respondents still had high perceived barriers to using floss and mouthrinse regularly and consequently these habits were not included in their daily oral hygiene regimen. Understanding the perceptions regarding oral health behaviors may help drive more effective interventions and assist practitioners in improving their patients' oral health outcomes.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Sodium Bicarbonate Toothpaste in Subjects with Gingivitis: A 6-Month Randomized Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: Sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) in toothpaste can enhance the removal of biofilms involved in the development of gingivitis. To examine this over an extended time period, this study compared the efficacy and tolerability of twice-daily brushing for 24 weeks with 67% or 0% NaHCO3-containing toothpastes in subjects with moderate gingivitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 247 adults with bleeding after brushing and ≥ 20 gingival bleeding sites were randomized to twice-daily brushing with a 67% NaHCO3 or 0% NaHCO3 toothpaste. The primary efficacy variables were between-treatment differences in number of bleeding sites and the Modified Gingival Index (MGI) score after 24 weeks' use. Secondary efficacy variables included Bleeding Index (BI) and Turesky modification of Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TPI) (overall and only interproximal sites). RESULTS: The 67% NaHCO3 toothpaste produced statistically significant improvements compared with the 0% NaHCO3 toothpaste in number of bleeding sites (-17.5; 95% CI -20.32, -14.66; p < 0.0001) and MGI score (-0.2; 95% CI -0.24, -0.17; p < 0.0001) at week 24. These significant differences were also found at 6 and 12 weeks for these measures and at 6, 12, and 24 weeks for BI and TPI scores (including at only interproximal sites) (all p < 0.0001). No treatment-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Twice-daily brushing with 67% NaHCO3 toothpaste was generally well tolerated and significantly improved indices of gingival bleeding and plaque compared with 0% NaHCO3 toothpaste in subjects with moderate gingivitis.

In situ anticaries efficacy of dentifrices with different formulations - A pooled analysis of results from three randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: Data generated from three similar in situ caries crossover studies presented the opportunity to conduct a pooled analysis to investigate how dentifrice formulations with different fluoride salts and combinations at concentrations of 1400-1450 ppm F, different abrasive systems and in some cases, carbomer (Carb), affect enamel caries lesion remineralization and fluoridation. METHODS: Subjects continuously wore modified partial dentures holding two gauze-covered partially-demineralized human enamel specimens for 14 days and brushed 2×/day with their assigned dentifrice: Study 1: sodium fluoride (NaF)/Carb/silica, NaF/silica, NaF + monofluorophosphate (MFP)/chalk; Study 2: NaF/Carb/silica, NaF + MFP/dical, amine fluoride (AmF)/silica; Study 3: NaF/Carb/silica, NaF + stannous fluoride (SnF2)/silica/hexametaphosphate (HMP). All studies included Placebo (0 ppm F) and/or dose-response controls (675 ppm F as NaF [675F-NaF]) ±Carb. Specimens were evaluated for percentage surface microhardness recovery (SMHR) and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU). RESULTS: All 1400-1450 ppm F dentifrices except NaF + SnF2/silica/HMP provided significantly greater lesion remineralization than Placebo (p < 0.0001): differences in SMHR ranged from 17.46% (NaF + MFP/dical) to 26.66% (AmF/silica). For EFU (back-transformed log EFU), all 1400-1450 ppm F dentifrices gave significant fluoride uptake compared to Placebo (p < 0.0001): increases in EFU ranged from 4.95 µg F/cm2 (NaF + SnF2/silica/HMP) to 16.32 µg F/cm2 (NaF/carb/silica). Dentifrices containing NaF or AmF as sole fluoride source provided the greatest remineralization and fluoridation; Carb addition did not alter fluoride efficacy; some excipients appeared to interfere with the cariostatic action of fluoride. Treatments were generally well-tolerated with ≤4 treatment-related adverse events per study. CONCLUSION: Commercially available fluoride dentifrices varied greatly in their ability to remineralize and fluoridate early caries lesions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Fluoride dentifrices are the most impactful anticaries modality worldwide. While clinical caries trials have not consistently shown the superiority of one formulation over another, these findings using a sensitive in situ caries model indicated that dentifrices containing NaF or AmF as the sole fluoride source provided the greatest remineralization and fluoridation benefits.

A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the plaque removal efficacy of sodium bicarbonate dentifrices in a single brushing clinical model.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate plaque removal efficacy of dentifrices containing sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) compared with a non-NaHCO3 dentifrice after a single-timed brushing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomised, controlled, examiner-blinded, four-period, crossover study in 56 adults with a mean whole-mouth plaque index of ≥2.00 (six site modification of Turesky modification of Quigley-Hein Plaque Index [TPI]). Subjects brushed once for one timed minute with a 67% NaHCO3 dentifrice with herbs; a 67% NaHCO3 dentifrice without herbs; a 62% NaHCO3 dentifrice with herbs; or a non-NaHCO3 dentifrice without herbs. All contained 923 p.p.m. fluoride as sodium fluoride. Pre- and post-brushing plaque assessments were performed. RESULTS: Mean TPI score decreased from pre- to post-brushing with all treatments. There were statistically significantly greater reductions in plaque for NaHCO3 dentifrices compared to non-NaHCO3 (p < 0.0001 for all) with no significant differences between NaHCO3-containing dentifrices. A post hoc analysis of plaque removal from different oral areas showed statistically significant differences in favour of the NaHCO3 dentifrices over the non-NaHCO3 dentifrice for almost all surfaces. No adverse events were reported. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Plaque removal was significantly greater with NaHCO3-containing dentifrices compared with a non-NaHCO3 dentifrice after a single, timed brushing. There was no effect of herbal tinctures. This study was registered at ClincalTrials.org: NCT03285984.

Six-Month Evaluation of a Sodium Bicarbonate-Containing Toothpaste for Reduction of Established Gingivitis: A Randomized USA-Based Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Short-term use of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3)-containing toothpaste reduces plaque and improves clinical measures of gingivitis. To examine this over a longer period, we compared efficacy and tolerability of twice-daily brushing for 24 weeks with 67% or 0% NaHCO3-containing toothpastes in USA-based participants with moderate gingivitis (Clinicaltrials.gov:NCT02207400). METHODS: This was a six-month, randomized, examiner-blind, parallel-group, clinical trial. Investigators randomized adults with blood in expectorate after brushing and ≥ 20 gingival bleeding sites to 67% NaHCO3 (n = 123; n = 107 completed study) or 0% NaHCO3 (n = 123; n = 109 completed study) toothpastes. Primary efficacy variables included between-treatment differences in number of bleeding sites and Modified Gingival Index (MGI) score at 24 weeks. Secondary efficacy variables included Bleeding Index and Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (overall and interproximal sites) at six, 12, and 24 weeks. A subset of 50 participants underwent sampling to assess plaque microbiology over the course of treatment. RESULTS: Compared with the 0% NaHCO3 toothpaste, the 67% NaHCO3 toothpaste produced statistically significant improvements at Week 24 in number of bleeding sites (46.7% difference) and MGI (33.9% difference), and for all other endpoints (all p < 0.0001). There was no significant between-treatment difference in the proportion of participants harboring opportunistic pathogens. Products were generally well tolerated, with two and five treatment-related adverse events reported in the 67% and 0% NaHCO3 toothpaste groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Gingival bleeding, gingivitis, and plaque indices were significantly improved at six, 12, and 24 weeks with twice-daily brushing with 67% NaHCO3-containing toothpaste in participants with moderate gingivitis.

Two Randomized Clinical Studies to Confirm Differential Plaque Removal by Sodium Bicarbonate Dentifrices in a Single Timed Brushing Model.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated and compared plaque removal efficacy of commercially available dentifrices containing sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) to those without NaHCO3 in a single timed brushing clinical study model. METHODS: Two randomized, examiner-blind, three-period, three-treatment, crossover studies were performed in adults with a mean Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TPI) score of = 2.00. In Study 1, 60 subjects were randomized to commercially available dentifrices containing: (i) 67% NaHCO3 plus 1425 ppm fluoride (F) as sodium fluoride (NaF); (ii) 45% NaHCO3 plus 1425 ppm F as NaF; or (iii) 0% NaHCO3 plus silica and 1450 ppm F as NaF. In Study 2, 55 subjects were randomized to commercially available dentifrices containing: (i) 67% NaHCO3 plus 1425 ppm F as NaF; (ii) 0% NaHCO3 plus silica and 1400 ppm F as amine F/stannous F; or (iii) 0% NaHCO3 plus chlorhexidine/aluminum lactate and silica with 1360 ppm F as aluminum F. In both studies, subjects brushed their teeth for one timed minute under supervised conditions. Plaque was assessed pre- and post-brushing according to a six-site modification of the TPI. Mean TPI score was analyzed using an analysis of covariance model with treatment and study period as fixed effects, subject as a random variable, and pre-brushing score as a covariate. RESULTS: In both studies, mean TPI score decreased in all groups post-brushing compared with pre-brushing. In Study 1, statistically significant improvements in mean TPI score were reported with the 67% and 45% NaHCO3 dentifrices compared with the 0% NaHCO3 dentifrice (p = 0.0003 and p = 0.0005, respectively). In Study 2, improvements in mean TPI score were statistically significantly greater with the 67% NaHCO3 dentifrice compared with both 0% NaHCO3 dentifrices (p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). All dentifrices were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: A single timed brushing with commercially available dentifrices containing 67% or 45% NaHCO3 exerted a significantly greater effect on plaque removal than commercially available dentifrices without NaHCO3.

A randomised clinical trial to evaluate the effect of a 67 % sodium bicarbonate-containing dentifrice on 0.2 % chlorhexidine digluconate mouthwash tooth staining.

BACKGROUND: Gingivitis can develop as a reaction to dental plaque. It can be limited by curtailing plaque build-up through actions including tooth brushing and the use of medicinal mouthwashes, such as those containing chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX), that can reach parts of the mouth that may be missed when brushing. This study aimed to compare dental stain control of twice-daily brushing with a sodium fluoride (NaF) dentifrice containing 67 % sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) or a commercially available NaF silica dentifrice without NaHCO3, while using a mouthwash containing 0.2 % CHX. METHODS: This was a 6-week, randomised, two-site, examiner-blind, parallel-group study in healthy subjects with at least 'mild' stain levels on the facial surfaces of ≥4 teeth and ≥15 bleeding sites. Assessment was via modified Lobene Stain Index (MLSI), the score being the mean of stain intensity multiplied by area (MLSI [IxA]). RESULTS: One hundred and fifty of 160 randomised subjects completed the study. There were no significant differences in Overall (facial and lingual) MLSI (IxA) scores between dentifrices. The Facial MLSI (IxA) was statistically significant at 6 weeks, favouring the 67 % NaHCO3 dentifrice (p = 0.0404). Post-hoc analysis, conducted due to a significant site interaction, found significant differences for all MLSI scores in favour of the 67 % NaHCO3 dentifrice at Site 1 (both weeks) but not Site 2. CONCLUSIONS: No overall significant differences were found between a 67 and 0 % NaHCO3 dentifrice in controlling CHX stain; a significant difference on facial surfaces suggests advantage of the former on more accessible surfaces. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01962493 ) on 10 October 2013 and was funded by GSK Consumer Healthcare.

A randomized clinical trial in subjects with dry mouth evaluating subjective perceptions of an experimental oral gel, an oral rinse and a mouth spray compared to water.

PURPOSE: This multicenter, randomized, parallel group study analyzed the effectiveness of an experimental oral gel, a commercially available oral rinse and a commercially available mouth spray versus water alone at relieving self-reported symptoms of dry mouth over a 28-day home use treatment period. The effects of the study treatments on dry mouth-related quality of life (QoL) were also investigated. METHODS: Eligible subjects were stratified by dry mouth severity (mild, moderate or severe) and randomized to receive one of the study treatments. Prior to first use they completed a questionnaire designed to assess their baseline dry mouth-related QoL. Following first use and on Day 8 (2 hours post-treatment only) and Day 29, subjects completed the modified Product Performance and Attributes Questionnaire (PPAQ) I at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 hours post-treatment. Subjects further assessed treatment performance using the PPAQ II questionnaire on Days 8 and 29 and the dry mouth-related QoL questionnaire on Day 29. RESULTS: In 396 randomized subjects almost all comparisons of responses to PPAQ I, including those for the primary endpoint (response to PPAQ I Question 1 'Relieving the discomfort of dry mouth' after 2 hours on Day 29), were statistically significant in favor of active treatment groups versus water (P < 0.05). All comparisons of responses to PPAQ II on Days 8 and 29 were statistically significant in favor of active treatments versus water (P < 0.05). Moreover, nearly all comparisons for dry mouth-related QoL scores on Day 29 were statistically significant in favor of the active treatments versus water. All the dry mouth management strategies in this trial were well tolerated.

A Randomized Clinical Study to Evaluate the Effect of Two Experimental Toothpastes on Tooth Enamel Gloss and Smoothness.

OBJECTIVES: The study compared the effects on examiner-assessed tooth gloss and smoothness of two experimental toothpastes (1% or 2% alumina abrasive) with a reference, silica-based toothpaste used twice daily for one, four, and eight weeks. The study also monitored the safety of the products. METHODS: This was a randomized, examiner-blind study, stratified by gloss score and age, three-treatment, parallel-group using healthy adult volunteers. Following a two-week washout period where subjects brushed with a conventional silica-abrasive toothpaste, 169 subjects began the trial period after receiving a dental scaling and polishing using the washout toothpaste. Subjects brushed for two minutes, twice daily, with their assigned toothpaste. The experimental toothpastes contained 927 ppm fluoride as NaF with either 1% or 2% alumina as the sole abrasive. The reference toothpaste contained 927 ppm fluoride as NaF in a conventional amorphous silica abrasive base. Enamel polish (i.e., gloss) was assessed visually by comparing the facial surfaces of the maxillary incisors with a set of standards. Tooth smoothness was assessed by lightly dragging a dental explorer over the surface. RESULTS: Subjects using the 2% alumina toothpaste had significantly higher gloss compared to the reference toothpaste at Weeks 1 and 4, but the difference was of borderline significance at Week 8 (one-covariate analysis: p = 0.0529; two-covariate analysis: p = 0.0494). Subjects using the 1% alumina toothpaste had significantly higher gloss improvement scores than the reference toothpaste at Weeks 4 and 8, but not at Week 1. All three treatment groups' gloss scores improved during the study. Regarding tooth smoothness, the effects of the experimental toothpastes followed a broadly similar profile to the effects on tooth gloss. After four weeks' use, both experimental toothpastes were superior to the reference. After eight weeks' use, however, only the 2% alumina toothpaste approached significant superiority versus the reference (p = 0.0639). CONCLUSIONS: The 1% and 2% alumina toothpastes improved tooth gloss compared to a standard silica toothpaste when used twice daily for two minutes over an eight-week study period. Furthermore, there was evidence of a corresponding increase in tooth smoothness.

Evaluation of the Oral Tolerance of Three Fluoride Toothpaste Formulations in a Dry Mouth Population: Results from Two Randomized Studies.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the oral tolerance of three experimental toothpaste formulations containing sodium fluoride (NaF), compared with two marketed sodium monofluorophosphate (SMFP)-containing biotène® toothpastes, in a dry mouth population after 14 days (primary objective) and 7 days (secondary objective) of use. METHODS: Toothpastes were tested in two separate dual-site, examiner-blind, randomized, parallel group studies in subjects (35-84 years) with self-reported dry mouth. Oral soft tissue (OST) and oral hard tissue (OHT) examinations were performed at screening, followed by a 7- to 28-day wash-in period using a control toothpaste. Subjects were randomized to receive a NaF-containing toothpaste (Study 1: commercially available toothpaste Pronamel® for Children, n = 82; Study 2: experimental plaque biofilm-loosening formula [PBF] toothpaste, n = 79; or experimental Gentle Mint toothpaste, n = 78) or a reference toothpaste (Study 1: biotène® Fresh Mint Original toothpaste [previously marketed formulation], n = 82; Study 2: biotène® Gentle Mint Gel toothpaste [previously marketed formulation], n = 77) during the 14-day treatment phase. Subjects brushed their teeth twice daily for one timed minute with a ribbon of toothpaste to cover the head of the toothbrush provided. Subjects received further OST and OHT examinations at Day 1 and Day 15, and an additional OST examination at Day 8. Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were reported throughout the study. RESULTS: Study 1: At Day 15, 42 oral treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported in 33 subjects, of which seven in five subjects (commercially available toothpaste Pronamel for Children: n = 2; control: n = 3) were considered to be treatment-related. One SAE (dyspnea) was reported in a participant who was randomized but withdrew from the study before receiving the allocated toothpaste. Study 2: At Day 15, 41 oral TEAEs were reported in 38 subjects, of which two in two subjects (experimental Gentle Mint toothpaste: n = 1; control: n = 1) were considered treatment-related, according to the investigator. No SAEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In both studies, the experimental and reference toothpastes were well tolerated after 7 and 14 days of use. The experimental NaF-containing toothpastes offer potential alternatives to individuals with dry mouth.

The effect of dentifrice quantity and toothbrushing behaviour on oral delivery and retention of fluoride in vivo.

While toothpaste F(-) concentration and rinsing regimen have well-characterised impacts on fluoride's effectiveness, other aspects of brushing regimen have much less well-established effects, in particular, dentifrice quantity and brushing duration. An in vivo study (n = 42) of oral fluoride delivery (i.e. oral disposition post-brushing), and retention (i.e. concentration of F(-) in saliva post-brushing, a known efficacy predictor), was performed to compare effects observed with those of dentifrice F(-) concentration and rinsing regimen. Subjects brushed with a NaF-silica dentifrice (Aquafresh Advanced, 1,150 ppm F(-) ) or a control dentifrice (250 ppm F(-) , same base), for 45, 60, 120 or 180 seconds with 0.5 or 1.5 g dentifrice, and rinsed with 15 ml water once or three times in a cross-over design. The F(-) concentration was measured in post-brushing expectorate, rinse and toothbrush washing samples, and in saliva between 5-120 minutes after brushing. Using 1.5 g versus 0.5 g dentifrice increased F(-) in all samples: oral retention of F(-) was almost doubled by this increase. Increasing duration of brushing had more complex effects. The amount of F(-) in the expectorate increased but decreased in both rinse and toothbrush washing samples. Oral F(-) retention increased, but only in the period 30-120 minutes after brushing. Over the ranges investigated, the order of importance on oral F(-) retention was: dentifrice F(-) concentration > quantity > rinsing regimen > brushing duration. Hence, increasing dentifrice quantity and, to a lesser extent, the duration of brushing, can elevate oral fluoride post-brushing. Evidence is accumulating that the importance of these variables to fluoride efficacy may have been underestimated.

How much is a 'pea-sized amount'? A study of dentifrice dosing by parents in three countries.

To provide optimal fluoride effectiveness against caries while minimising risk of negative effects from excessive ingestion from toothbrushing, the fluoride dose delivered at each occasion is critical. This is particularly important for young children, so using a 'pea-sized amount' is generally recommended. However, there appears little guidance regarding what this means in practice, although it has been indicated to be 0.25 g. This study investigated, using conventional toothpastes and toothbrushes in Germany, the USA and the UK, how much toothpaste parents dispense for their 3- to 6 year-old children, and their interpretation of a 'pea-sized' amount of toothpaste. When asked to dispense the amount they would normally for their child, the majority of parents dosed substantially more than 0.25 g; in Germany, all parents over-dispensed. The amount dispensed varied widely: those parents at the 75th centile dispensed approximately twice the amount dispensed by those at the 25th centile, irrespective of country. When asked to dispense a pea-sized amount, the mean amount dosed decreased significantly in all countries. In the USA, electric toothbrush users dispensed about 0.1 g more than manual toothbrush users. While over-dispensing of fluoride toothpaste remains a cause for concern, it may be argued that the general recommendation to use a pea-sized amount of toothpaste generally works well in practice to balance the conflicting demands of risk and benefit from toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste in young children.

A randomised clinical study to evaluate experimental children's toothpastes in an in-situ palatal caries model in children aged 11-14 years.

OBJECTIVES: To compare three children's sodium fluoride toothpastes to placebo with respect to enamel remineralisation potential, enamel fluoride uptake and net acid resistance using an in situ palatal caries model in children aged 11-14 years following a single brushing. DESIGN: This was a randomised, single blind (laboratory analyst), single-centre, four-treatment, crossover study with a 7-day washout period between treatments. The treatments were 1,426 ppm fluoride, 1,000 ppm fluoride, 500 ppm fluoride and 0 ppm fluoride (placebo) toothpaste (NaF/silica). A custom made in situ palatal appliance was used by each subject in all treatment periods. At each of the four treatment visits subjects wore the appliance containing four partially demineralised human enamel specimens for 5 minutes and then brushed their teeth using a standardised procedure for 60 seconds under supervision using 1.0 g (±0.1 g) of their assigned toothpaste. After 4 hours the appliance was removed and enamel specimen recovered. This process was repeated until all subjects completed all four study treatment visits. Recovered enamel specimens were analysed for per cent surface microhardness recovery (%SMHR; Knoop) and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU; microdrill biopsy). Subsequently, specimens were demineralised in vitro to determine their % net acid resistance (%NAR; Knoop). RESULTS: All three fluoride toothpastes demonstrated significantly greater %SMHR, EFU and %NAR compared with 0 ppm F toothpaste. The model demonstrated a dose response over the range 0 to 1,426 ppm fluoride for %SMHR, EFU and %NAR. There was no significant difference between 500 ppm F and 1,000 ppm F for %SMHR and between 1,000 ppm F and 1,426 ppm F for %SMHR, EFU and %NAR. CONCLUSIONS: The present in situ study demonstrated that the children's fluoride toothpastes tested are capable of delivering cariostatic amounts of fluoride to early caries lesions following a single brushing.

A randomised clinical study to evaluate the effect of brushing duration on fluoride levels in dental biofilm fluid and saliva in children aged 4-5 years.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect of 40 seconds versus 2 minutes brushing on saliva and dental biofilm fluid fluoride in children ages 4-5 years over 1 hour. DESIGN: This was a single-blind, cross-over, randomised, two-period clinical study in healthy children. Three days before the start of each treatment subjects received a thorough brushing and then refrained from all oral hygiene procedures. At treatment visits, after collecting baseline biofilm and saliva samples, staff brushed the occlusal surfaces of the subject's posterior teeth with a pea-sized amount (0.25 g) of NaF/silica toothpaste for the randomised time. Samples were taken at 5 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes and 60 minutes after brushing and analysed for fluoride using a microanalytical methodology. There was a minimum 4-day washout period between treatments. RESULTS: Log changes from baseline biofilm fluid and saliva fluoride were statistically significant (P < 0.05) for both brushing times at all post-brushing time-points [except 60 minutes saliva where P = 0.06 (t-test)]. Statistically significantly greater ln-AUC (area under the curve) was found for biofilm fluid and salivary fluoride after brushing for 2 minutes compared with brushing for 40 seconds over the 1-hour test period. There was a statistically significantly higher concentration of fluoride in the log change from baseline saliva levels after 5, 15, 30 and 60 minutes for the 2-minute brushing time compared with 40 seconds brushing time. There was no statistically significant difference in concentration of log change from baseline fluoride levels in biofilm fluid at each individual time-point (5, 15, 30 and 60 minutes) for the 2-minute brushing time compared with the 40-second brushing time, but significant differences were observed for 15, 30 and 60 minutes in favour of 2-minute brushing time when log biofilm fluid value was analysed. CONCLUSION: The findings provide further evidence for the benefits of increased duration of brushing with respect to fluoride delivery.