Abstract
Data sources
Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL).
Study selection
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) in adults 18 years of age comparing CHX DF/gel with CHX MW written in English or Dutch were considered.
Data extraction and synthesis
Two reviewers independently selected studies, abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, a meta-analysis was performed. Difference in means values between test and control at both baseline and end was calculated using a fixed-effects model.
Results
Five RCTs were included, four had a parallel design and one was a cross-over trial. Three studies showed a positive score in favour of the mouthwash. Three studies contributed to a meta-analysis of the effect on 'de novo' plaque formation. There was a difference in means of 0.27 [95% CI: 0.14; 0.39] (P < 0.0001) in favour of CHX MW. One study assessed tooth staining finding more staining with the use of CHX MW compared to the CHX DF/gel.
Conclusions
Chlorhexidine gel can be successfully formulated and will inhibit plaque growth to some degree, but not to the same extent, as a CHX MW. When CHX DF/gel is used in a non-brushing model, it is significantly less effective in plaque inhibition compared to CHX MW. Based on one study when CHX gel was applied with a finger after brushing, it is significantly more effective on plaque scores and the gingival index. The only brushing study also with a long follow-up showed that there is no significant difference between CHX DF and CHX MW. However, as a corollary, significantly more tooth discoloration was observed with the CHX MW. Altogether, the data show that when daily oral hygiene cannot be performed, CHX MW is the first product of choice.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Slot DE, Berchier CE, Addy M, Van der Velden U, Van der Weijden GA . The efficacy of chlorhexidine dentifrice or gel on plaque, clinical parameters of gingival inflammation and tooth discoloration: a systematic review. Int J Dent Hyg 2014; 12: 25–35.
Van Strydonck DA, Slot DE, Van der Velden U, Van der Weijden F . Effect of a chlorhexidine mouthrinse on plaque, gingival inflammation and staining in gingivitis patients: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 2012; 39: 1042–1055.
Herrera D . Chlorhexidine mouthwash reduces plaque and gingivitis. Evid Based Dent 2013; 14: 17–18.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Address for correspondence: DE Slot, Department of Periodontology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and VU University Amsterdam, Gustav Mahlerlaan 3004, 1081 LA Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail: d.slot@acta.nl
Supranoto SC, Slot DE, Addy M, Van der Weijden GA. The effect of chlorhexidine dentifrice or gel versus chlorhexidine mouthwash on plaque, gingivitis, bleeding and tooth discoloration: a systematic review. Int J Dent Hyg 2015; 13: 83–92.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Richards, D. Chlorhexidine mouthwash more effective than dentifrice or gel. Evid Based Dent 16, 59 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401102
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401102
