Anticalculus effect of a dentifrice containing 0.5% zinc citrate trihydrate.

What Was Tested

The paper reports a study of Zinc, published as a randomized controlled trial.

From a population of 1600 subjects exhibiting calculus, 1210 subjects (age 18 and over) were selected and received a dental prophylaxis.

The subjects were initially stratified on the basis of calculus score, age, and sex, then allocated randomly to a 3-month usage period of one of two treatment groups.

Who Took Part

The abstract describes 1600 subjects taking part.

The age groups tagged for this paper are adults, both men and women.

How the Study Was Run

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

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

Neither the subjects nor the staff measuring them knew who was on Zinc, so expectations could not easily colour the readings.

Some subjects received a placebo instead of Zinc, giving a reference point.

Calculus was assessed using the Volpe-Manhold Index.

Oral soft tissue status was assessed throughout the course of the study.

What Was Measured

The subjects were initially stratified on the basis of calculus score, age, and sex, then allocated randomly to a 3-month usage period of one of two treatment groups.

The subject headings attached to it are Citrates, Citric Acid, Dental Calculus, Dentifrices, Observer Variation and Zinc.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study of Zinc in 1600 subjects.

With several hundred people or more, it is a fairly large study for this kind of research.

The publication is from 1991 (Community dentistry and oral epidemiology), a journal based in Denmark.

More context: the related Vitamin D, K2, Magnesium and Zinc library page, all human trials.