World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2023 ) > List of Articles


Efficacy of Herbal Extracts and Synthetic Solutions as Toothbrush Disinfectants against Streptococcus mutans: A Double-blinded, Randomized, In Vivo Clinical Trial

Murugesan Subhashini, Gurusamy Ramalakshmi, Karuppiah Gokulapriyan, Adimoolam Chinnadurai Saranya, Ramasubramanian Palanivel Pandian, Veeraraghavan Ramya, Amit Kumar

Keywords : Bacteria, Chlorhexidine, Contamination, Disinfection, Green tea, Herbal extract, Neem, Oral hygiene, Plaque, Toothbrush, White vinegar

Citation Information : Subhashini M, Ramalakshmi G, Gokulapriyan K, Saranya AC, Pandian RP, Ramya V, Kumar A. Efficacy of Herbal Extracts and Synthetic Solutions as Toothbrush Disinfectants against Streptococcus mutans: A Double-blinded, Randomized, In Vivo Clinical Trial. World J Dent 2023; 14 (12):1103-1107.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2330

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 31-01-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Aim: The study's aim was to compare the efficacy of 3% neem, 50% white vinegar, and a 40 mg/mL concentration of green tea, 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX) gluconate, as disinfectants in reducing the number of Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans) in toothbrushes. Materials and Methods: The study was a parallel-arm, double-blinded, randomized, in vivo comparative experiment with 50 young adults selected at random by simple random sampling. The participants were divided into five experimental groups—group I with 3% neem extract, group II with 50% white vinegar, group III with 40 mg/mL of green tea extract, group IV with 0.2% CHX, and group V with plain water as the control. The participants were trained to immerse the toothbrush in the test solutions for 20 minutes after brushing daily for 7 consecutive days. All of the toothbrushes were tested for baseline values prior to intervention. The toothbrush bristles were collected after 7 days and underwent microbial analysis. The mean bacterial count for S. mutans was determined. Results: The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 2.1 was used to conduct the statistical analysis. Paired t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were the two statistical tests utilized. All of the groups, with the exception of the control group, saw a statistically significant (p < 0.001) decrease in the number of S. mutans. The reduction in S. mutans is significantly different between groups I, II, III, and IV (p < 0.001). In group V, there were no significant changes. Conclusion: The bacterial counts of S. mutans in toothbrush bristles were successfully reduced using both herbal products and synthetic disinfectants. However, when compared to the other groups, 50% white vinegar performed the best. Clinical significance: It is essential for every individual to disinfect their toothbrush, either using herbal or synthetic solutions, in order to uphold good oral hygiene and systemic health, especially in immunocompromised patients.

  1. Efstratiou M, Papaioannou W, Nakou M, et al. Contamination of a toothbrush with antibacterial properties by oral microorganisms. J Dent 2007;35(4):331–337. DOI: 10.1016/J.Jdent.2006.10.007
  2. Nascimento AP, Watanabe E, Ito IY. Toothbrush contamination by Candida Spp. and efficacy of mouthrinse spray for their disinfection. Mycopathologia 2010;169(2):133–138. DOI: 10.1007/S11046-009-9239-Z
  3. Frazelle MR, Munro CL. Toothbrush contamination: a review of the literature. Nurs Res Pract 2012;2012:420630. DOI: 10.1155/2012/420630
  4. Taji SS, Rogers AH. ADRF Trebitsch Scholarship. The microbial contamination of toothbrushes. a pilot study. Aust Dent J 1998;43(2):128–130. DOI: 10.1111/J.1834-7819.1998.Tb06101.X
  5. Ankola AV, Hebbal M, Eshwar S. How clean is the toothbrush that cleans your tooth? Int J Dent Hyg 2009;7(4):237–240. DOI: 10.1111/J.1601-5037.2009.00384.X
  6. Glass RT, Jensen HG. More on the contaminated toothbrush: the viral story. Quintessence Int 1988;19(10):713–716. PMID: 2855888.
  7. Bhat SS, Hegde KS, George RM. Microbial contamination of tooth brushes and their decontamination. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2003;21(3):108–112. PMID: 14703217.
  8. Center for Disease Control and Prevention – Cdc, Division Of Oral Health. The Use and Handling of Toothbrushes: Infection Control. [Cited 2008 Aug 19]. Available From: Http://Www.Cdc.Gov/Oralhealth/Infectioncontrol/FactsheetsToothbrushes.Htm
  9. Mobin M, Borba Cde M, Filho CA, et al. Analysis of fungal contamination and disinfection of toothbrushes. Acta Odontol Latinoam 2011;24(1):86–91. PMID: 22010412.
  10. Komiyama EY, Back-Brito GN, Balducci I, et al. Evaluation of alternative methods for the disinfection of toothbrushes. Braz Oral Res 2010;24(1):28–33. DOI: 10.1590/s1806-83242010000100005
  11. Bertolini PF, Biondi Filho O, Pomilio A, et al. Antimicrobial capacity of Aloe vera and propolis dentifrice against streptococcus mutans strains in toothbrushes: an in vitro study. J Appl Oral Sci 2012;20(1):32–37. DOI: 10.1590/S1678-77572012000100007
  12. Spolidorio DM, Tardivo TA, dos Reis Derceli J, et al. Evaluation of two alternative methods for disinfection of toothbrushes and tongue scrapers. Int J Dent Hyg 2011;9(4):279–283. DOI: 10.1111/J.1601-5037.2011.00503.X
  13. Karibasappa GN, Nagesh L, Sujatha BK. Assessment of microbial contamination of toothbrush head: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22(1):2–5. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.79965
  14. Nelson-Filho P, Pereira MS, De Rossi A, et al. Children's toothbrush contamination in day-care centers: how to solve this problem? Clin Oral Investig 2014;18(8):1969–1974. DOI: 10.1007/S00784-013-1169-Y
  15. do Nascimento C, Sorgini MB, Pita MS, et al. Effectiveness of three antimicrobial mouthrinses on the disinfection of toothbrushes stored in closed containers: a randomized clinical investigation by DNA checkerboard and culture. Gerodontology 2014;31(3):227–236. DOI: 10.1111/Ger.12035
  16. Turner LA, Mccombs GB, Hynes WL, et al. A novel approach to controlling bacterial contamination on toothbrushes: chlorhexidine coating. Int J Dent Hyg 2009;7(4):241–245. DOI: 10.1111/J.1601-5037.2008.00352
  17. Balappanavar AY, Nagesh L, Ankola AV, et al. Antimicrobial efficacy of various disinfecting solutions in reducing the contamination of the toothbrush – a comparative study. Oral Health Prev Dent 2009;7(2):137–145. PMID: 19583039.
  18. Bhat PK, Badiyani BK, Sarkar S, et al. Effectiveness of antimicrobial solutions on Streptococcus mutans in used toothbrushes. World J Dent 2012;3(1):6–10. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1119
  19. Aarati N, Ranganath N, Soumya B, et al. Evaluation of antibacterial and anticandidal efficacy of aqueous and alcoholic extract of neem (Azadirachta Indica). An in vitro study. Int J Res Ayurveda Pharm 2011;2:230–235.
  20. Nanjunda-Swamy K, Madihalli AU, Prashanth MB. Evaluation of streptococcus mutans contamination of tooth brushes and their decontamination using various disinfectants - an in vitro study. J Adv Oral Res 2011;2:23–30. DOI: 10.1177/2229411220110318
  21. Sogi SH, Subbareddy VV, Kiran SN. Contamination of toothbrush at different time intervals and effectiveness of various disinfecting solutions in reducing the contamination of toothbrush. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2002;20(3):81–85. PMID: 12435003.
  22. Kudva S, Prabhakar S, Pai V, et al. Effects of garlic extract on salivary pH: a clinical study. Arch Orofac Sci 2012;7:1–8.
  23. da Silva FC, Kimpara ET, Mancini MN, et al. Effectiveness of six different disinfectants on removing five microbial species and effects on the topographic characteristics of acrylic resin. J Prosthodont 2008;17(8):627–633. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00358.x
  24. Kamath U, Sheth H, Ramesh S, et al. Comparison of the antibacterial efficacy of tea tree oil with 3% sodium hypochlorite and 2% chlorhexidine against E. faecalis: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent 2013;3(3):117–120. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10031-1049
  25. Basman A, Peker I, Akca G, et al. Evaluation of toothbrush disinfection via different methods. Braz Oral Res 2016;30:S1806–83242016000100203. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.