A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Effectiveness of Preprocedural Mouthwashes: A Triple-Blind Randomised Controlled Clinical Trial. | LitMetric

Objectives: Bioaerosols generated during dental treatment are considered to be potentially carriers of infectious respiratory pathogens. The use of preprocedural mouthwashes has been suggested to reduce microbial load prior to dental surgery procedures. However, limited evidence on the effectiveness of preprocedural mouthwashes regarding mitigating respiratory pathogens exists. The aim of this clinical trial is to determine and compare the effectiveness of 3 preprocedural mouthwashes recommended by the Department of Health of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the mitigation of respiratory pathogens during dental care in pandemic times.

Methods: In all, 228 participants were block-randomised to three groups based on preprocedural mouthwash used: povidone-iodine, hydrogen peroxide, and chlorhexidine digluconate. Participants, operators, and assessors were blinded to the assigned mouthwashes (triple-blind). Saliva was assessed for the presence of a number of respiratory pathogens (19 viruses including SARS-CoV-2). Changes in the prevalence and mean number of "any" pathogen present following mouthwash use were determined.

Results: Overall, the prevalence of any detected respiratory viral pathogens in the preprocedural saliva was 3.5% as compared to the postprocedural saliva: 1.3% (P = .034). The mean (SD) number of viruses was significantly lower following preprocedural mouthwash use, from 0.04 (0.18) to 0.01 (0.11) (P = .025). No significant differences were observed in the downward change (∆) of any detected virus (prevalence) (P = .155) or in the reduction of the mean number (∆) of any detected virus in the postprocedural saliva compared to preprocedural saliva of participants with respect to mouthwash used (P = .375).

Conclusions: The practice of using preprocedural mouthwash, as recommended by the government of Hong Kong, was effective in reducing the number of respiratory pathogens present during dental aerosol-generating treatment. This study lends support for official policy on use of preprocedural mouthwashes, which has significant implications for practice and policy during pandemics.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2024.08.017DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

preprocedural mouthwashes
20
respiratory pathogens
20
effectiveness preprocedural
12
preprocedural mouthwash
12
preprocedural
9
mouthwashes triple-blind
8
clinical trial
8
pathogens preprocedural
8
hong kong
8
pathogens dental
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!