We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
Oral Health and Preventive Dentistry



Forgotten password?


Oral Health Prev Dent 17 (2019), No. 4     16. Aug. 2019
Oral Health Prev Dent 17 (2019), No. 4  (16.08.2019)

Page 339-347, doi:10.3290/j.ohpd.a42504, PubMed:31093613

Comparative Evaluation of SmartMouth Clinical DDS Advanced Oral Rinse and Chlorhexidine Mouthrinse
Miley, D. Douglas / Garcia, M. Nathalia / Omran, Mohamed T. / Binz, Elizabeth D. / Fortino, Daniel J. / Siterlet, Angela C. / Hildebolt, Charles F.
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of SmartMouth Clinical DDS compared with 0.12% chlorhexidine and placebo mouthrinses.
Materials and Methods: Seventy-six subjects with gingivitis or chronic periodontitis were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical study. Examinations included Gingival Index (GI), Bleeding Score (BS), Plaque Index (PI), Tooth Stain Index (TSI), and Calculus Index (CI). Subjects were given a prophylaxis and oral hygiene instructions at the time of enrolment. Subjects were assigned to one of three groups: SmartMouth Clinical DDS (SM), 0.12% chlorhexidine (CHX), or placebo (PL). Subjects were examined at 3 and 6 weeks. Data were evaluated as differences from baseline for each group. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), t tests or non-parametric alternatives were used to analyse data.
Results: The GI, BS and PI decreases from baseline were statistically significant at both 3 and 6 weeks for all three groups (p ≤ 0.025). Differences between groups were not statistically significant, except that the PI decrease for CHX was significantly greater than PL at 6 weeks (p = 0.048). At 6 weeks there was a statistically significant increase in TSI for CHX (p ≤ 0.001). CI decreased significantly for all groups at 3 weeks (p ≤ 0.004) and for PL at 6 weeks (p ˂ 0.001). At 3 weeks and 6 weeks, the percentages for compliance were significantly higher for SM and PL than for CHX (p ˂ 0.001). SM had less taste alteration reported than CHX (p = 0.003).
Conclusion: While all three groups were shown to improve GI, BS and PI scores; non-prescription SM resulted in less taste alteration, less tooth stain and better compliance than CHX.

Keywords: cetylpyridinium chloride, chlorhexidine, mouthrinse, volatile sulphur compounds, zinc-ion