Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34556107›Full record

Trial reportBMC oral health2021

Biofilm formation following chitosan-based varnish or chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish application in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment: a double blinded randomised controlled trial.

Preethi Poornima, Jogikalmat Krithikadatta, Ratna Rachel Ponraj, Natanasabapathy Velmurugan, Anil Kishen

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC oral health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Mouthwashes: Alternatives and Future Directions.International dental journal · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Preethi PoornimaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, MAHER, Chennai, India.
Jogikalmat KrithikadattaDepartment of Cariology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Chennai, India. krithikadatta.sdc@saveetha.com.
Ratna Rachel PonrajDepartment of Orthodontics, Manipal Medical College, Melaka, Malaysia.
Natanasabapathy VelmuruganDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, MAHER, Chennai, India.
Anil KishenFaculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Anil.Kishen@utoronto.ca.
Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research · INManipal University College Malaysia · MYSaveetha University · INUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOrthodontic treatment poses an increased risk of plaque accumulation and demineralisation of enamel leading to white spot lesion around the brackets. This parallel arm trial aims to assess the degree of bacterial plaque formation adjacent to orthodontic brackets, following the application of a chitosan-based varnish or chlorhexidene-fluoride varnish.

methodsA total of 200 teeth from 20 patients undergoing fixed orthodontic therapy were assessed and biofilm formation around the brackets were recorded using the Bonded Bracket Index (Plaque index) at baseline and weekly for 6 weeks. The bacterial count and plaque pH at corresponding weekly intervals were also recorded. Following bracket bonding, the patients were cluster randomised to receive chitosan-based varnish-CHS (UNO Gel Bioschell, Germiphene corp., Brantford, Canada) or chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish-CFV (Cervitec F, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) every week on the representative teeth respectively. BBI proportions were compared between groups at all time intervals using Chi square test. Mean plaque bacterial count and plaque pH were compared using Mann Whitney U test and Tukey's HSD test respectively.

resultsBaseline characteristics were similar between the groups: Mean age was CHS = 23 and CFV = 21; male to female ratio was CHS = 5/5, CFV = 7/3. At the end of 6 weeks, chitosan-based varnish performed equal to chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish (P > 0.05) with 98% and 95% of teeth with acceptable scores respectively. The plaque bacterial count significantly reduced at 6 weeks for both varnish compared to the baseline; The value for CHS was 0.43 ± 0.4 × 10

conclusionThis trial showed that both chitosan-based varnish and chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish reduced bacterial count, while the plaque pH remained neutral over a period of six weeks in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic therapy. The anti-plaque effects of the natural biopolymeric chitosan-based varnish was similar to that of chlorhexidine-fluoride varnish, a known chemotherapeutic agent. Registration: This trial protocol was registered with https://www.ctri.nic.in (CTRI/2019/05/018896). (Date of registration 02/05/2019). PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement.

Indexed as

ChitosanDental CariesOrthodontic BracketsBiofilmsCariostatic AgentsChlorhexidineFemaleFluoridesFluorides, TopicalHumansMaleCariostatic AgentsChitosanChlorhexidineFluoridesFluorides, TopicalBonded Bracket IndexChitosanChlorhexideneDental plaqueFixed orthodontic therapy

Identifiers

PMID34556107
PMCPMC8459499
OpenAlexW3199209367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.