Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38537031›Full record

Trial reportJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2024

Anti-biofilm effectiveness of protocols for cleaning complete dentures in hospitalized patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Anna Clara Gurgel Gomes, Janaina Gomes Maciel, Amanda Aparecida Maia Neves Garcia, Letycia Accioly Simões Coelho, Giulia Murcia Rodrigues, Vinicius Carvalho Porto, Grigorios Polyzois, Marlise Inêz Klein, Simone Soares, Vanessa Migliorini Urban and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna Clara Gurgel GomesUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9990-3589
Janaina Gomes MacielUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7759-9603
Amanda Aparecida Maia Neves GarciaUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9774-1010
Letycia Accioly Simões CoelhoUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Dentística, Endodontia e Materiais Odontológicos, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0751-6988
Giulia Murcia RodriguesUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-9632-4094
Vinicius Carvalho PortoUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6609-9934
Grigorios PolyzoisNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Dentistry, Athens, Greece.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0828-3423
Marlise Inêz KleinUniversidade Estadual de Campinas, Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Departamento de Diagnóstico Oral, Piracicaba, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7916-1557
Simone SoaresUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0811-7302
Vanessa Migliorini UrbanUniversidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Departamento de Odontologia, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3320-8783
Karin Hermana NeppelenbroekUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Bauru, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7086-2667
Universidade de São Paulo · BRNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversidade Sagrado Coração · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDenture biofilm acts as a potential reservoir for respiratory pathogens, considerably increasing the risk of lung infections, specifically aspiration pneumonia, mainly 48h after hospital admission. The establishment of a straightforward, affordable, and applicable hygiene protocol in a hospital environment for the effective control of denture biofilm can be particularly useful to prevent respiratory infections or reduce the course of established lung disease.

objectivesTo evaluate the anti-biofilm effectiveness of denture cleaning protocols in hospitalized patients. METHODOLOGY: The maxillary complete dentures (MCDs) of 340 hospitalized participants were randomly cleaned once using one of the following 17 protocols (n=20): brushing with distilled water, toothpaste, or neutral liquid soap (controls); immersion in chemical solutions (1% sodium hypochlorite, alkaline peroxide, 0.12% or 2% chlorhexidine digluconate), or microwave irradiation (650 W for 3 min) combined or not with brushing. Before and after the application of the protocols, the biofilm of the intaglio surface of the MCDs was evaluated using two methods: denture biofilm coverage area (%) and microbiological quantitative cultures on blood agar and Sabouraud Dextrose Agar (CFU/mL). Data were subjected to the Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests (α=0.05).

resultsAll 17 protocols significantly reduced the percentage area of denture biofilm and microbial and fungal load (P<0.05). The highest percentage reductions in the area of denture biofilm were observed for 1% hypochlorite solution with or without brushing and for 2% chlorhexidine solution and microwave irradiation only in association with brushing (P<0.05). The greatest reductions in microbial and fungal load were found for the groups that used solutions of 2% chlorhexidine and 1% hypochlorite and microwave irradiation, regardless of the association with brushing (P<0.05).

conclusionsA single immersion for 10 min in 1% sodium hypochlorite, even in the absence of brushing, proved to be a straightforward, rapid, low-cost, and effective protocol for cleaning the dentures of hospitalized patients.

Indexed as

ChlorhexidineSodium HypochloriteAgarBiofilmsDenture CleansersDenture, CompleteDenturesHumansHypochlorous AcidAgarChlorhexidineDenture CleansersHypochlorous AcidSodium Hypochlorite

Identifiers

PMID38537031
PMCPMC10984580
OpenAlexW4393105927

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.