ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Effect of Antiseptic Mouthwash/Gargling Solutions on SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04409873 (Effect of Antiseptic Mouthwash/Gargling Solutions and Pre-procedural Rinse on SARS-CoV-2 Load), which is not on this 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.
Effect of Antiseptic Mouthwash/Gargling Solutions and Pre-procedural Rinse on SARS-CoV-2 Load (COVID-19)
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant global mortality. Despite declining infection rates, new variants of SARS-CoV-2 continue to emerge, necessitating new prevention strategies. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of four over-the-counter (OTC) antiseptic mouthwash/gargling solutions in the U.S., compared with a distilled water control, on SARS-CoV-2 viral load across multiple oral and oropharyngeal sample types. Methods: This pilot single-center randomized controlled clinical trial enrolled adults in the San Francisco Bay Area, California, who tested positive for COVID-19. Participants were randomized to distilled water, chlorine dioxide, hydrogen peroxide, cetylpyridinium chloride, and essential oils. Participants were instructed to rinse and gargle four times daily for four weeks using standardized instructions to ensure protocol adherence. Samples were collected on Days 1, 7, and 28 and analyzed using reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). The primary outcome was the change in SARS-CoV-2 viral load from baseline to Day 28, assessed using cycle threshold (Ct) values. Secondary outcomes included self-reported clinical symptoms and hospitalization. Results: Forty-nine participants completed the study. No mouthwash demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in SARS-CoV-2 viral load over time. Cetylpyridinium chloride showed a transient increase in Ct values on Day 7 that was not sustained on Day 28. At baseline, throat swab samples had the lowest Ct values across all sample types. Due to limited subgroup sample sizes for secondary outcome measures, no statistical or moderator analyses were conducted. Conclusion: Further large-scale randomized trials are needed before recommending antiseptic mouthwashes for SARS-CoV-2 prevention or management. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04409873.
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.