Comparison of the effect of salt water rinse, sugar-free chewing gum and tooth brushing on the pH of saliva

Manisha (1) , Deepa Gurunathan (2) , Senthil Kumar M (3)
(1) Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences (SIMATS), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, India ,
(2) Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences (SIMATS), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, India ,
(3) Department of Pedodontics, RVS dental college and Hospital, Kannampalayam, Sulur, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India, India

Abstract

To compare the effect of salt water rinse, sugar – free chewing gum and tooth brushing on the pH of saliva. 30 participants were included in the study. Baseline pH was measured using a digital pH meter. The participants were asked to swish their mouths with sucrose solution, and pH was measured. They were randomly divided into three groups namely; Group A – salt water rinse, Group B -sugar-free chewing gum and Group C - tooth brushing. After the intervention, the final pH was measured, and the recordings were compared. Repeated measures ANOVA test was used to compare the pH at Baseline, after rinsing and after an intervention. Bonferroni post-hoc test was done to do pair-wise comparison within the groups. There was significant difference pH at baseline and after intervention in all the three groups with Group B showing better results followed by Group C and then Group A. Sugar-free chewing gum significantly increased the pH of the saliva followed by tooth brushing and then salt water rinse.

Full text article

Generated from XML file

Authors

Manisha
Deepa Gurunathan
drgdeepa@yahoo.co.in (Primary Contact)
Senthil Kumar M
Manisha, Deepa Gurunathan, & Senthil Kumar M. (2019). Comparison of the effect of salt water rinse, sugar-free chewing gum and tooth brushing on the pH of saliva. International Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences, 10(2), 922–926. Retrieved from https://ijrps.com/home/article/view/3606

Article Details

No Related Submission Found