ISSN 0974-3618 (Print) www.rjptonline.org
0974-360X
(Online)
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Efficacy of Different Substances in the Control of Halitosis
Samrithi Yuvaraj1, Gheena. S2
1BDS 1st Year, Saveetha Dental College and
Hospitals, Chennai
2Professor, Department of
Oral Pathology, Saveetha
Dental College and Hospitals, Chennai
*Corresponding Author E-mail: samrithiyuvaraj@hotmail.com
ABSTRACT:
AIM: To study the effect of different substances on halitosis
OBJECTIVE: Halitosis
is very common in the general population and more than half of the world’s
population suffers from this problem. Halitosis affects a person’s
daily life negatively.
Halitosis
has multifactorial origins but in most cases it originates from plaque,
calculus and other adherent biofilm.
BACKGROUND: The main aim of this study is to assess the effect
different substances have in controlling halitosis.
REASON: Mouthwash has
always been considered as the gold standard to help control halitosis. But
there are a number of other substances that also control it. So this study aims
at seeing which of these substances has the most efficacy in controlling
halitosis.
KEY
WORDS: Halitosis, Bad Breath, Mouth
Wash, Polo, Orbit
INTRODUCTION:
Bad
breath medically referred to as halitosis is an embarrassing health condition
that affects approximately 30% of people around the world.[1]
Halitosis
is caused by a group of anaerobic sulphur producing bacteria that breeds
underneath the tongue and often in the throat and tonsillar area.
Bad
breath lowers self esteem and affects
every day life. It also has great impact on relationships. People with
halitosis tend to have low self confidence.
Halitosis
can be controlled by practicing proper oral hygiene, brushing twice a day
and using dental aids like mouthwash or
floss will help to almost completely eliminate the problem.
This
research aims at finding out which substance is most efficient in controlling
or ameliorating halitosis.
Received on 15.04.2015 Modified on 10.06.2015
Accepted on 20.06.2015 © RJPT All right reserved
Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 8(8): August, 2015; Page 1132-1134
DOI: 10.5958/0974-360X.2015.00200.0
MATERIALS AND
METHODS:
25
people were randomly selected for this study. They were asked to rate their bad
breath on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0
meant no halitosis and 10 meant chronic bad breath.
Four
substances were selected – mouthwash, polo, orbit and hot water with salt.
The
selected people were asked to use each substance for a period of one week, at
the end of each week they were asked to reevaluate their halitosis on the same
scale.
All
these scores were tabulated. Statistics were done to determine which of the
four substances has the most efficacy in controlling halitosis.
RESULTS:
MOUTHWASH
BEFORE MOUTHWASH
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
2 |
5 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
3 |
8 |
32.0 |
32.0 |
52.0 |
4 |
9 |
36.0 |
36.0 |
88.0 |
5 |
3 |
12.0 |
12.0 |
100.0 |
TOTAL |
25 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
AFTER MOUTHWASH
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
0 |
4 |
16.0 |
16.0 |
16.0 |
1 |
12 |
48.0 |
48.0 |
64.0 |
2 |
6 |
24.0 |
24.0 |
88.0 |
3 |
3 |
12.0 |
12.0 |
100.0 |
TOTAL |
25 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
20%
of people rated their bad breath
as 2, 32%
as 3, 36%
as 4 and 12% of people as 5 before using mouthwash. After
using mouthwash 16% of people rated
their bad breath as 0, 48% as 1,
24% as 2 and 12% as 3.
So
there is significant decrease in halitosis after the use of mouth wash for a
week, according to statistical data.
POLO
BEFORE POLO
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
2 |
5 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
3 |
8 |
32.0 |
32.0 |
52.0 |
4 |
9 |
36.0 |
36.0 |
88.0 |
5 |
3 |
12.0 |
12.0 |
100.0 |
TOTAL |
25 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
AFTER POLO
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
1 |
1 |
4.0 |
4.0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
12.0 |
12.0 |
2 |
3 |
10 |
40.0 |
40.0 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
24.0 |
24.0 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
12.0 |
12.0 |
5 |
6 |
2 |
8.0 |
8.0 |
6 |
Before
using polo, 20% of people rated their
bad breath as 2, 32% as 3, 36% as 4 and 12%
as 5. After using polo for one week, 4% of people rated their bad breath
as 1, 12% as 2, 40% as 3, 24% as 4, 12% as 5 and 8% as 6.
There
is no significant decrease in halitosis
due to the usage of polo.
ORBIT
BEFORE ORBIT
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
2 |
5 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
3 |
8 |
32.0 |
32.0 |
52.0 |
4 |
9 |
36.0 |
36.0 |
88.0 |
5 |
3 |
12.0 |
12.0 |
100.0 |
TOTAL |
25 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
AFTER ORBIT
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
1 |
1 |
4.0 |
4.0 |
4.0 |
2 |
5 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
24.0 |
3 |
9 |
36.0 |
36.0 |
60.0 |
4 |
9 |
36.0 |
36.0 |
96.0 |
5 |
1 |
4.0 |
4.0 |
100.0 |
TOTAL |
25 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
20%
of people rated their bad breath as 2,
32% as 3, 36% as 4 and 12% as 5. After using
orbit for a period of one week, 4% people rated their bad breath as 1, 20% as
2, 36% as 3, 36% as 4 and 4% as 5.
There
is no significant decrease in halitosis due to the usage of orbit.
HOT WATER WITH SALT
BEFORE HOT WATER WITH SALT
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
2 |
5 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
20.0 |
3 |
8 |
32.0 |
32.0 |
52.0 |
4 |
9 |
36.0 |
36.0 |
88.0 |
5 |
3 |
12.0 |
12.0 |
100.0 |
TOTAL |
25 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
AFTER HOT WATER WITH SALT
Valid |
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid percent |
Cumulative percent |
3 |
8 |
32.0 |
32.0 |
32.0 |
4 |
10 |
40.0 |
40.0 |
72.0 |
5 |
6 |
24.0 |
24.0 |
96.0 |
6 |
1 |
4.0 |
4.0 |
100.0 |
TOTAL |
25 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
Before
gargling with hot water and salt, 20% of
people rated their bad breath as 2, 32% as 3, 36% as 4 and 12% as 5.
After
gargling with hot water and salt for a period of one week, 32% of people rated
their bad breath as 3, 40% as 4, 24% as 5 and 4 % of people as 6.
According
to statistical data, there is a significant increase in halitosis.
NON PARAMETRIC TEST
WILCOXON SIGNED RANKS TEST
|
After
mothwash -before mouthwash |
After
polo –before polo |
After
orbit –before orbit |
After
hot water with salt– before hot water with salt |
Z |
4.338
(p< 0.001 ) |
0.607
(NS) |
0.790
(NS) |
2.839
(p < 0.01 ) |
KRUSKAL - WALLIS TEST (TO ASSESS THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF TREATMENTS –TO SEE WHICH TREATMENT IS MOST EFFECTIVE)
|
TREATMENT |
N |
MEAN RANK |
BEFORE |
MOUTH
WASH |
25 |
50.50 |
|
POLO |
25 |
50.50 |
|
ORBIT |
25 |
50.50 |
|
HOT
WATER WITH SALT |
25 |
50.50 |
|
TOTAL |
100 |
|
AFTER |
MOUTH
WASH |
25 |
17.74 |
|
POLO |
25 |
59.54 |
|
ORBIT |
25 |
53.36 |
|
HOT
WATER WITH SALT |
25 |
71.36 |
|
TOTAL |
100 |
|
TEST STATISTICS (a,b)
|
BEFORE |
AFTER |
KRUSKAL – WALLIS CHI SQUARE |
0.000
(NS) |
49.925
( p < 0.001 ) |
Hence
from the statistical data, it can be concluded that mouthwash has the most
efficiency in controlling halitosis.
DISCUSSION:
Most
adults and many children suffer from halitosis occasionally, chronically and
regularly.[2] but they do
not always go in for treatment as they
are embarrassed about their problem.
The
most common substance used for the treatment of halitosis is mouth wash. Most
mouth washes contain fluoride, which helps to fight cavities and prevent
periodontal disease.[3]
Some
mouth wash solutions contain alcohol. The major drawback of using alcohol based
is irritation and burning of the oral mucosa and dry mouth.[3]
Prolonged
or overuse of alcohol based mouth rinses causes oral cancer. A 2009 Australian
study found that alcohol containing mouth wash solutions allow carcinogens to
penetrate into mouth lining increasing oral cancer risk.[4]
The
other substances that are used for controlling bad breath are breath mints and
chewing gum.
Polo
is basically a breath mint. Breath mints primarily freshen a person’s breath by
masking offensive odour. They also stimulate the flow of saliva which helps in
removing food and bacterial debris, thus preventing plaque formation.[5]
Eating
too much mint will cause irritation of the mucous membrane.[6]
Chewing
gum is good for oral health and also for teeth as it increase the flow of
saliva, that helps to flush out sugars and food debris. It also neutralizes
decay causing acids in our mouth. Chewing gum prevents buildup of plaque. They
also whiten our teeth and prevent staining.[7]
Chewing
gum contains sugar as one of the core component. So chewing gum essentially
equates to bating our teeth in sugar. This causes tooth decay.[8] If the chewing gum is
sugar free, it may contain acidic flavoring that will lead to dental erosion
with prolonged usage.[8]
A
natural remedy used for treating halitosis is hot water and salt. This rinse is
an excellent short term solution, especially when there are wounds in the oral
cavity.
The
reason these salt water rinses are so good is because salt hastens the healing
process and acts as a natural disinfectant.[9]
But
long term use of mouth rinses are not recommended because it could cause
erosion of the teeth. The acidity of salt water softens enamel and makes teeth
more susceptible to chipping and cavities.[9]
CONCLUSION:
Therefore
halitosis can be controlled by maintaining proper oral hygiene, visiting the
dentist regularly and using mouth wash or any other dental aids. If studies are
conducted with other substances, a better alternative for control of halitosis
may be found.
REFERENCES:
[1] www.therabreath.com
[2] Jon.L. Richter,: Diagnosis and Treatment of
Halitosis
[3] www.wisegeek.com
[4] McCullough. M.J, Farah. C.S : The role of
alcohol in oral carcinogenesis with particular reference to alcohol containing
mouth washes
[5] Wikipedia
[6] www.buzzle.com
[7] www.chewinggumfacts.com
[8] articles.mercola.com
[9]
www.todaysdentistry.com.au