Effect of different mouthrinses on morning breath.

What Was Tested

The paper reports a study of Cetylpyridinium and Chlorhexidine, published as a randomized controlled trial.

Morning breath odor is an often-encountered complaint.

Who Took Part

By PubMed's age tags, the people studied were adults, both men and women.

Twelve medical students with a healthy periodontium refrained from all means of mechanical plaque control during 3 experimental periods of 12 days (with intervening washout periods of at least 3 weeks).

At the 12-day visit, a questionnaire (subjective ratings) was completed and samples taken from both the tongue coating and the saliva for anaerobic and aerobic culturing and vitality staining.

How the Study Was Run

The design is described as randomized, double-blind and crossover.

The participants were allocated by chance, so the Cetylpyridinium group and the comparison group should start out alike.

Blinding on both sides kept the participants and researchers unaware of who received Cetylpyridinium.

Each person switched between Cetylpyridinium and the comparison at some point, usually with a gap in between.

A professional oral cleaning preceded each period.

All parameters were correlated with the baseline registrations.

What Was Measured

The subject headings attached to it are Anti-Infective Agents, Local, Bacteria, Anaerobic, Breath Tests, Cetylpyridinium, Chlorhexidine, Circadian Rhythm and Colony Count, Microbial.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized, double-blind and crossover study of Cetylpyridinium and Chlorhexidine.

The abstract goes on to report its results in about 7 sentences; this page does not restate them, so read the paper for the findings and their limits.

The publication is from 2001 (Journal of periodontology), a journal based in United States.

More context: all human trials.