ArticleBMC oral health2026
Influencing viable oral bacteria in the patient's oral cavity and on the dentist's mask.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChlorhexidine (CHX) can lower the bacterial contamination on masks. This study explores how effectively CHX reduces the bacterial spectrum in the patient's oral cavity and subsequently how this influences the contamination of masks.
methodsTwo intraoral samples were collected prior to any aerosol-generating treatment: the first before a 60-s CHX rinse and the second 10 min after. After dental treatment, the practitioner's mask was imprinted onto agar plates. After cultivation, a Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-ToF) was used to identify the colony forming units. The identified species of the intraoral samples and mask imprints were then analysed based upon matches in bacterial species and quantity.
resultsA total of 108 unique patients were included, each receiving one aerosol-producing treatment. The total number of detected bacterial species in the oral cavity before the CHX rinse was 628, after 490. Staphylococcus aureus was found twice as often before the CHX rinse. The average amount of colony forming units on the mask's imprints after the CHX rinse was 15.2. The bacterial species occurred in very similar proportions, with Staphylococcus species making up more than 50%. No species match between the oral samples and mask samples after the CHX rinse occurred most frequently (68.5%), followed by one match (25.9), two matches (3.7%) and three matches (1.9%).
conclusionsA preprocedural CHX rinse reduces bacterial contamination on masks but has little effect on the spectrum of transmitted microorganisms. Our results suggest that the bacterial spectrum on the mask was not significantly influenced by the preprocedural change in the oral microbiota. Therefore, while CHX enhances clinical hygiene, it does not eliminate the risk of pathogenic transmission.
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.