Premium
Benefit of “one‐stage full‐mouth disinfection” is explained by disinfection and root planing within 24 hours: a randomized controlled trial
Author(s) -
Quirynen Marc,
De Soete Marc,
Boschmans Geert,
Pauwels Martine,
Coucke Wim,
Teughels Wim,
Van Steenberghe Daniel
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2006.00959.x
Subject(s) - scaling and root planing , dentistry , chlorhexidine , medicine , randomized controlled trial , periodontitis , mouth rinse , fluoride , quadrant (abdomen) , chronic periodontitis , surgery , chemistry , inorganic chemistry
Objectives: The beneficial effects of the one‐stage, full‐mouth disinfection remain controversial in the scientific literature. This might be due to the fact that an entire mouth disinfection with the use of antiseptics has been confused with a full‐mouth scaling and root planing. This parallel, single blind RCT study aimed to compare several full‐mouth treatment strategies with each other. Material and methods: Seventy‐one patients with moderate periodontitis were randomly allocated to one of the following treatment strategies: scaling and root planing, quadrant by quadrant, at two‐week intervals (negative control, NC), full‐mouth scaling and root planing within 2 consecutive days (FRP), or three one‐stage, full‐mouth disinfection (FM) protocols within 2 consecutive days applying antiseptics to all intra‐oral niches for periopathogens using as antiseptics: chlorhexidine (FMCHX) for 2 months, amine fluoride/stannous fluoride for 2 months (FMF), or chlorhexidine for 2 months followed by amine fluoride/stannous fluoride for another 6 months (FMCHX+F). At baseline and after 2, 4, and 8 a series of periodontal parameters were recorded. Results: All treatment strategies resulted in significant ( p <0.05) improvements of all clinical parameters over the entire duration of the study. Inter‐treatment differences were often encountered. The NC group nearly always showed significant smaller improvements than the two CHX groups. The differences between the FRP or FM groups, and the two CHX groups only sporadically reached a statistical significance. Conclusion: These observations indicate that the benefits of the “OSFMD” protocol are partially due to the use of the antiseptics and partially to the completion of the therapy in a short time.