Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25689859›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2015

Antiplaque effect of essential oils and 0.2% chlorhexidine on an in situ model of oral biofilm growth: a randomised clinical trial.

Víctor Quintas, Isabel Prada-López, Nikolaos Donos, David Suárez-Quintanilla, Inmaculada Tomás

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02124655 phase4completednot on this map

Antiplaque Effect of Essential Oils and 0.2% Chlorhexidine on an in Situ Model of Oral Biofilm Growth: a Randomised Clinical Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Santiago de CompostelaRan2012Enrolled15ConditionsOral Biofilm, Mouthwash, PeriodontitisArmsEssential oils, 0.2% chlorhexidine, Sterile water
NCT02946801 phase4unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Antiplaque Effect of Essential Oils and 0.2% Chlorhexidine on an in Situ Model of Oral Biofilm Growth. A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Santiago de CompostelaRan2016 to 2016Enrolled20ConditionsBiofilms, Oils, Essential, PeriodontitisArmsEssential oils, Essential oils without alcohol, Sterile water
NCT03146390 phase4unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Essential Oils With and Without Alcohol: in Vivo Antibacterial Effect

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Santiago de CompostelaRan2017 to 2017Enrolled20ConditionsOral Biofilm, Dental Plaque, PeriodontitisArmsEssential oils, Alcohol free essential oils, Water
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. The effect of fruit extracts containing phenolic compounds on the survivability of Streptococcus mutans: an in vitro study.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Effect of Plant-Based Mouthwash (Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Pneumonia prevention in the elderly patients: the other sides.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2021
    Article
  11. Effects of Cinnamon (Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Journal of oral microbiology · 2018
    Article
  14. Frontiers in microbiology · 2017
    Article
  15. Anti-biofilm Activity as a Health Issue.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016
    Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Víctor QuintasOral Sciences Research Group, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Isabel Prada-LópezOral Sciences Research Group, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Nikolaos DonosPeriodontology Unit, UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, United Kingdom.
David Suárez-QuintanillaOral Sciences Research Group, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Inmaculada TomásOral Sciences Research Group, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela · ESUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the in situ antiplaque effect after 4 days of using of 2 commercial antimicrobial agents in short term on undisturbed plaque-like biofilm. TRIAL DESIGN AND

participantsAn observer-masked, crossover randomised clinical trial on 15 oral and systemically healthy volunteers between 20-30 years who were randomly and sequentially allocated in the same group which performed 3 interventions in different randomised sequences.

interventionThe participants wore an appliance in 3 different rinsing periods doing mouthwashes twice a day (1/0/1) with essential oils, 0.2% chlorhexidine or sterile water (negative control). At the end of each 4-day mouthwash period, samples were removed from the appliance. Posteriorly, after bacterial vital staining, samples were analysed using a Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope.

main outcome measuresBacterial vitality, thickness and covering grade by the biofilm after 4 days of applying each of the mouthwashes.

resultsThe essential oils and the 0.2% chlorhexidine were significantly more effective than the sterile water at reducing bacterial vitality, thickness and covering grade by the biofilm. No significant differences were found between the 0.2% chlorhexidine and the essential oils at reducing the bacterial vitality (13.2% vs. 14.7%). However, the 0.2% chlorhexidine showed more reduction than the essential oils in thickness (6.5 μm vs. 10.0 μm; p<0.05) and covering grade by the biofilm (20.0% vs. 54.3%; p<0.001).

conclusionThe essential oils and 0.2% chlorhexidine showed a high antiplaque effect. Although the 0.2% chlorhexidine showed better results with regard to reducing the thickness and covering grade by the biofilm, both antiseptics showed a high and similar antibacterial activity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Daily essential oils or 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwashes are effective when reducing dental plaque formation in the short term. Although 0.2% chlorhexidine continues to be the "gold standard" in terms of antiplaque effect, essential oils could be considered a reliable alternative.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02124655.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBiofilmsChlorhexidineCross-Over StudiesDental PlaqueFemaleHumansMaleMicrobial ViabilityMouthwashesOils, VolatileTime FactorsAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidineMouthwashesOils, Volatile

Identifiers

PMID25689859
PMCPMC4331278
OpenAlexW2047546135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.