Effect of Single Rinsing With Three Different Types of Mouthwash on VSC Levels in Morning Breath

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

36 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-09-03

Study Completion Date

2020-01-16

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Morning bad breath (MBB) is often an enduring upset; this double blind, crossover, randomized study aimed to evaluate the bad breath-suppressing of 3 commercially available mouth rinses (Mentadent Professional® 0.05%chlorhexidine (MPc), Meridol® Halitosis (MH) and CB12®) and a placebo on morning halitosis during a washout period of 1 week.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Effect of a Mouthwash Containing Chlorhexidine and Chlorine Dioxide on Halitosis

NCT07265102

Halitosis

COMPLETED NA

Four-Week Oral Malodor and Clinical Safety for a Concentrated Cosmetic Mouthwash

NCT06479096

Oral Malodor

COMPLETED NA

A Clinical Trial to Assess the Effects of a Mouthwash Containing Chlorine Dioxide on Oral Malodor

NCT00655772

Halitosis

COMPLETED PHASE1

Comparing Site Specific Mouth Disinfection With Commercial Oral Mouth Rinse With Traditional Oral Maouth Disinfection

NCT02221193

Oral Odor (Halitosis) The Study Want to Know if Site Specific Mouth Rinsing With Oral Mouth Disinfectants Can be Better Than Paonoral Mouth Rinsing

COMPLETED EARLY_PHASE1

Chios Mastic Mouthwash and Halitosis and Oral Hygiene in Orthodontic Patients

NCT05647369

Halitosis Orthodontic Appliance Complication

COMPLETED NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The study was designed as a double-masked, four-group, randomized, crossover clinical trial.

The volunteers were randomly assigned. Randomization was performed using computer generated random numbers. The allocation of active or control solutions was undertaken by a person not directly involved in the research project. No changes to methods after trial commencement (such as eligibility criteria) were performed.

Participants Thirty-six nondental student volunteers (17 women and 15 men; age range 34-22 years old; mean age 27,7) participated in the study. The subjects were recruited through advertisements. All of the candidates were screened for suitability by the research team. The selection criteria were: Good general health condition, dentition with ≥20 evaluable teeth (minimum of five teeth per quadrant), no oral lesions, no severe periodontal problems (no probing depth ≥5 mm or attachment loss \>2 mm), and no removable prostheses or orthodontic bands or appliances. Persons allergic to several mouthwash components were excluded from the study. All eligible volunteers were given oral and written information about the products and the purpose of the study and were asked to sign an informed consent form. The study was conducted from 3 September 2018 to 10 December 2019 in the Division of Periodontology, University of L'Aquila.

During the first information meeting, at each participant was given the mouthwash samples to be tested and a sealed envelope in which the sequence to follow was specified. The sequence also included the use of a placebo. The subjects were asked not to change their eating habits, but to refrain from taking halogen substances on the evenings prior the evaluations.

About 12 hours before the analysis, the participants, refraining from oral hygiene practices, performed a 30-second rinse, followed by a gargle. They also committed themselves not to take food or drinks, not to brush their teeth, not to smoke and not to use cosmetics (their fragrances could have disturbed the operator's perception of odours), between this practice and the evaluation.

The following morning the values of hydrogen sulphide, methyl mercaptan and dimethyl sulphide were measured and the values of the Rosenberg scale (0. Absence of odor;1. Barely perceptible odor;2. Slight but clearly perceptible odor;3. Moderate odour; 4. Very annoying smell; 5. Extremely bad smell) and the Winkel index (0. Absence of patina;1. Slight presence of patina; 2. Considerable presence of patina) were assigned. The assessment of morning halitosis was carried out through organoleptic measurement with a lingual patina supervision and with the aid of a dedicated device, the Oral Chroma.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Halitosis

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Caregivers

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.