How to deal with morning bad breath: A randomized, crossover clinical trial

Context: The absence of a protocol for the treatment of halitosis has led us to compare mouthrinses with mechanical oral hygiene procedures for treating morning breath by employing a hand-held sulfide monitor. Aims: To compare the efficacy of five modalities of treatment for controlling morning hali...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jeronimo M Oliveira-Neto (Author), Sandra Sato (Author), Vinicius Pedrazzi (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_41f5be63a0cb4fbba0baff06f006f12d
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Jeronimo M Oliveira-Neto  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Sandra Sato  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Vinicius Pedrazzi  |e author 
245 0 0 |a How to deal with morning bad breath: A randomized, crossover clinical trial 
260 |b Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications,   |c 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 0972-124X 
500 |a 10.4103/0972-124X.124497 
520 |a Context: The absence of a protocol for the treatment of halitosis has led us to compare mouthrinses with mechanical oral hygiene procedures for treating morning breath by employing a hand-held sulfide monitor. Aims: To compare the efficacy of five modalities of treatment for controlling morning halitosis in subjects with no dental or periodontal disease. Settings and Design: This is a five-period, randomized, crossover clinical trial. Materials and Methods: Twenty volunteers were randomly assigned to the trial. Testing involved the use of a conventional tongue scraper, a tongue scraper joined to the back of a toothbrush's head, two mouthrinses (0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride and 0.12% chlorhexidine digluconate) and a soft-bristled toothbrush and fluoride toothpaste for practicing oral hygiene. Statistical Analysis Used: Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 17 for Windows and NCSS 2007 software (P < 0.05). The products and the periods were compared with each other using the Friedman's test. When significant differences (P < 0.05) were determined, the products and periods were compared in pairs by using the Wilcoxon's test and by adjusting the original significance level (0.05) for multiple comparisons by using the Bonferroni's method. Results: The toothbrush's tongue scraper was able to significantly reduce bad breath for up to 2 h. Chlorhexidine reduced bad breath only at the end of the second hour, an effect that lasted for 3 h. Conclusions: Mechanical tongue cleaning was able to immediately reduce bad breath for a short period, whereas chlorhexidine and mechanical oral hygiene reduced bad breath for longer periods, achieving the best results against morning breath. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Halitosis 
690 |a mouthwashes 
690 |a tongue scraper 
690 |a sulfide monitor 
690 |a Dentistry 
690 |a RK1-715 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology, Vol 17, Iss 6, Pp 757-761 (2013) 
787 0 |n http://www.jisponline.com/article.asp?issn=0972-124X;year=2013;volume=17;issue=6;spage=757;epage=761;aulast=Oliveira-Neto 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/0972-124X 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/41f5be63a0cb4fbba0baff06f006f12d  |z Connect to this object online.