ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2013
Antibacterial activity of selected commercial products for mouth washing and disinfection, assessed in accordance with PN-EN 1040.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bovine ocular microbiome: the next frontier in managing Pinkeye in cattle.Animal microbiome · 2025Article
- Comparative in vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activities of povidone-iodine and other commercially available antiseptics against clinically relevant pathogens.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2021Article
- Essential Oils as Antimicrobial Agents-Myth or Real Alternative?Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Evaluation of mycobactericidal activity of selected chemical disinfectants and antiseptics according to European standards.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, there is a wide range of products for mouth washing on the Polish market. They have different qualitative and quantitative compositions, and they differ particularly in the concentration of active substances. In antisepsis and disinfection, the significant reduction in number of cells of microorganisms in a particular environment is very crucial. The chemical agents should provide a significant decrease in number of microorganisms in a relatively short time. The purpose of this study was to examine the bactericidal activity of selected herbal products used for treatment of inflammation, and disinfection and washing of the mouth, having antibacterial activity as declared by the manufacturers. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe study included 28 products for mouth washing and disinfection available in Poland. Bactericidal activity was studied using a quantitative suspension test according to the standard PN-EN 1040.
resultsOnly 1 of 4 tested herbal products, registered as medicinal products, showed satisfactory antibacterial activity when they were used according to the manufacturer's recommendations. A total of 13 preparations (48%) complied with the standard requirements against all tested strains. Up to 19% of products showed no bactericidal activity against bacterial strains, and up to 33% were only effective against certain microorganisms.
conclusionsThe informational literature accompanying most antiseptics should be corrected by the manufacturers, providing information about antimicrobial activity consistent with the requirements of applicable standards. The information on the packaging or in the leaflets for antiseptic products should be corrected by the manufacturers to include accurate information on antimicrobial activity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.