ArticleJournal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP
Anti-plaque efficacy of Hi-Ora mouthrinse and 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate in patients with chronic gingivitis: A case-control study.
Article in Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of a new mouthwash formulated with Chlorhexidine and Cymenol after a scaling and root planing treatment in grade I and II periodontal patients.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2024Trial
- Use of over-the-counter mouthwashes as an additional measure in individual oral prophylaxis on adults with plaque-induced gingivitis: a double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- On-demand caries prevention: on-site generated slightly acidic electrolyzed water as a potent and biocompatible anti- Streptococcus mutans agent.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Cariogenic Microbiota and Emerging Antibacterial Materials to Combat Dental Caries: A Literature Review.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the effects of Andiz extract on the experimentally wound in rats by microbiological and gene expression methods.Molecular biology reports · 2024Article
- Revisiting Oral Antiseptics, Microorganism Targets and Effectiveness.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chlorhexidine (CHX) gluconate has remained the gold standard chemical plaque control agent till date, though, being associated with several disadvantages including its tendency to stain teeth and leading to irritation of soft tissues. To overcome these inherent disadvantages, there has been a surge of studies in the recent past to evaluate the efficacy of herbal mouthrinses as against CHX. Objective: The present study was planned to compare the anti-plaque efficacy of Hi-Ora mouthrinse as against 0.12% CHX in patients with chronic gingivitis. Materials and Methods: The present study was designed as a case-control study including 90 patients with chronic gingivitis who were divided into 3 groups including Group A in which 0.12% CHX was prescribed, Group B in which patients were prescribed Hi-Ora and Group C in which normal saline was prescribed after oral prophylaxis while the mean Gingival Index (GI) and Plaque Index (PI) scores were recorded on the 5 Results: The mean GI score in CHX group was found to be 0.70 ± 0.25 as against 0.66 ± 0.16 in Hi-Ora and 1.59 ± 0.55 in normal saline groups. Similarly, the mean PI score in CHX group was found to be 0.80 ± 0.31 as against 0.77 ± 0.30 in Hi-Ora and 1.86 ± 0.61 in normal saline groups. Conclusions: The results of the present study suggested Hi-Ora to be more effective than 0.12% CHX in reducing the mean GI and PI scores among all the 3 groups.
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.