.
Background. The efficacy of an essential oil–containing antiseptic mouthrinse (Listerine Antiseptic, Pfizer) and an antiplaque/antigingivitis dentifrice (Colgate Total, Colgate-Palmolive) has been demonstrated in numerous double-blind clinical studies. This study was conducted to determine their comparative efficacy.
Methods. Three hundred sixteen subjects with mild-to-moderate gingival inflammation and plaque received a dental prophylaxis and began their randomly assigned brushing and rinsing regimen in an unsupervised setting. Subjects brushed for one minute and rinsed with 20 milliliters for 30 seconds twice daily for six months. The three groups were L (control toothpaste/Listerine rinse), T (Colgate Total toothpaste/control rinse) and P (control toothpaste/control rinse).
Results. Subjects in the L and T groups demonstrated statistically significantly lower (P < .001) Modified Gingival Index, or MGI; Bleeding Index, or BI; and Plaque Index, or PI, at both three and six months than subjects in the P group. The magnitude of reduction for the L group was 22.9 percent, 70 percent and 56.1 percent, respectively, and for the T group, 20.8 percent, 58 percent and 22.1 percent, respectively. Subjects in the L group were not different from subjects in the T group in regard to visual signs of gingivitis (MGI), but were more effective (P < .001) than subjects in the T group in experiencing reduced BI and PI. No product-related adverse events were reported.
Conclusion. Although the Listerine Antiseptic and Colgate Total antiplaque/antigingivitis products produced similar, clinically significant reductions in gingivitis (as measured by MGI and BI), Listerine, when used in conjunction with a fluoride dentifrice and usual oral hygiene, provided a greater benefit in reducing plaque.
Clinical Implications. When considering an antiplaque/antigingivitis product to recommend to patients, clinicians should consider Listerine Antiseptic, in conjunction with usual oral hygiene, if more rigorous plaque control is desired
.
