CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01122862Updated Sep 9, 2013Results posted

Effect of a Commercial Cosmetic Mouth Rinse on Plaque Re-growth

A Phase 2 interventional study of 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse and Cosmetic mouthrinse in Healthy Subjects, sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2013-09-09.

Sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline · Phase 2, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
23
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

A clinical study to evaluate the effect of a commercial mouth rinse on plaque re-growth

02

Conditions studied

  • Healthy Subjects

Keywords

  • tooth plaque
03

In context

Lead sponsor

GlaxoSmithKline is the lead sponsor of 3,562 studies on the registry; 117 are open to participants now.

Of its 258 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 232 (90%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Good general and oral health
  • At least 20 natural gradable teeth
  • Mean plaque score (Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index) of greater than or equal to 2.00 at the first baseline visit
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
23 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    0.12% Chlorhexidine Mouthrinse

    Commercially available 0.12% Chlorhexidine mouthrinse

    Drug: 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse

  • Active comparator
    Cosmetic mouthrinse

    Commercially available cosmetic mouthrinse

    Other: Cosmetic mouthrinse

  • Placebo comparator
    Sterile Water

    Sterile Water

    Other: Sterile water

Interventions

  • Drug0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse

    commercially available 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse

  • OtherCosmetic mouthrinse

    Commerically available cosmetic mouthrinse

  • OtherSterile water

    Sterile water

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Plaque Index of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Sterile Water After Day 4 of Treatment Administration

    Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

    Time frame: Day 4 post treatment administration

Secondary outcomes

  1. Plaque Index Score of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse After Day 4 of Treatment Administration

    Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

    Time frame: Day 4 post treatment administration

  2. Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration

    Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

    Time frame: Day 1 post treatment administration

  3. Interproximal Plaque Index After Day 4 of Treatment Administration

    Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

    Time frame: Day 4 post treatment administration

  4. Interproximal Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration

    Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

    Time frame: Day 1 post treatment administration

07

Results

Posted Jul 30, 2013

Participant flow

Participants were recruited at the clinical site.

Period 1
Participant flow — Period 1
MilestoneTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12%)Sterile Water
Started887
Completed877
Not completed010
Withdrew: Protocol violation010
Period 2
Participant flow — Period 2
MilestoneTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12%)Sterile Water
Started877
Completed876
Not completed001
Withdrew: Adverse event001
Period 3
Participant flow — Period 3
MilestoneTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12%)Sterile Water
Started678
Completed678
Not completed000

Outcome measures

PrimaryPlaque Index of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Sterile Water After Day 4 of Treatment Administration

Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

Time frame:
Day 4 post treatment administration
Reported as:
Mean · Score on a scale
Plaque Index of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Sterile Water After Day 4 of Treatment Administration
Score on a scaleTest Mouth RinseSterile Water
Plaque Index of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Sterile Water After Day 4 of Treatment Administration3.03 ± 0.103.23 ± 0.11
Statistical analysis
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Sterile Water · ANCOVA · p = 0.0915 (No adjustment for multiple comparisons were made as the primary comparison was pre-defined.) · Adjusted mean difference: -0.21 · 95% CI -0.45 to 0.03Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.
SecondaryPlaque Index Score of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse After Day 4 of Treatment Administration

Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

Time frame:
Day 4 post treatment administration
Reported as:
Mean · Score on a scale
Plaque Index Score of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse After Day 4 of Treatment Administration
Score on a scaleTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v)
Plaque Index Score of Test Mouth Rinse Versus Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse After Day 4 of Treatment Administration3.03 ± 0.101.36 ± 0.11
Statistical analysis
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v) · ANCOVA · p = <0.0001 (No adjustment for multiple comparisons were made as the primary comparison was pre-defined.) · Adjusted mean difference: 1.66 · 95% CI 1.42 to 1.90Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.
SecondaryPlaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration

Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

Time frame:
Day 1 post treatment administration
Reported as:
Mean · Score on a scale
Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration
Score on a scaleTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v)Sterile Water
Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration1.33 ± 0.090.58 ± 0.091.29 ± 0.09
Statistical analysis
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Sterile Water · ANCOVA · p = 0.6682 · Adjusted mean difference: 0.04 · 95% CI -0.14 to 0.21Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v) · ANCOVA · p = <0.0001 (No adjustment for multiple comparisons was made as the primary comparison was pre-defined.) · Adjusted mean difference: 0.74 · 95% CI 0.57 to 0.92Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.
SecondaryInterproximal Plaque Index After Day 4 of Treatment Administration

Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

Time frame:
Day 4 post treatment administration
Reported as:
Mean · Score on a scale
Interproximal Plaque Index After Day 4 of Treatment Administration
Score on a scaleTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v)Sterile Water
Interproximal Plaque Index After Day 4 of Treatment Administration3.17 ± 0.101.48 ± 0.113.36 ± 0.11
Statistical analysis
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Sterile Water · ANCOVA · p = 0.1100 (No adjustment for multiple comparisons was made as the primary comparison was pre-defined.) · Adjusted mean difference: -0.20 · 95% CI -0.44 to 0.05Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v) · ANCOVA · p = <0.0001 (No adjustment for multiple comparisons was made as the primary comparison was pre-defined.) · Adjusted mean difference: 1.68 · 95% CI 1.44 to 1.93Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.
SecondaryInterproximal Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration

Plaque scores were assessed using Turesky Modification of the Quigley Hein Index and categorized as 0: No plaque; 1: Slight flecks of plaque at the cervical margin of the tooth;2: A thin continuous band of plaque (1 mm or smaller) at the cervical margin of the tooth;3: A band of plaque wider than 1 mm but covering less than 1/3 of the crown of the tooth;4: Plaque covering at least 1/3 but less than 2/3 of the crown of the tooth;5: Plaque covering 2/3 or more of the crown of the tooth. The interproximal plaque index was calculated by taking the average of plaque scores over the mesiofacial, distofacial, mesiolingual and distolingual surfaces in the upper and lower jaws for a participant.

Time frame:
Day 1 post treatment administration
Reported as:
Mean · Score on a scale
Interproximal Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration
Score on a scaleTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v)Sterile Water
Interproximal Plaque Index After 24 Hours of Treatment Administration1.60 ± 0.110.72 ± 0.111.57 ± 0.11
Statistical analysis
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Sterile Water · ANCOVA · p = 0.7280 (No adjustment for multiple comparisons was made as the primary comparison was pre-defined.) · Adjusted mean difference: 0.03 · 95% CI -0.16 to 0.23Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.
  • Test Mouth Rinse vs Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v) · ANCOVA · p = <0.0001 (No adjustment for multiple comparisons was made as the primary comparison was pre-defined.) · Adjusted mean difference: 0.88 · 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08Difference is first named treatment minus second named treatment such that a negative difference favours the first named treatment.

Adverse events

Collected over All adverse events encountered or spontaneously reported following administration of any investigational product (including washout product), or for up to 5 days after the last administration of investigational product were recorded.. Non-serious events are listed at a 1% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Test Mouth Rinse—0/22 (0%)1/22 (4.5%)
Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v)—0/22 (0%)1/22 (4.5%)
Sterile Water—0/22 (0%)2/22 (9.1%)
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventTest Mouth RinseChlorhexidine Mouth Rinse (0.12% w/v)Sterile Water
Seasonal AllergyImmune system disorders0/220/221/22
PharyngitisInfections and infestations0/220/221/22
Multiple Sclerosis RelapseNervous system disorders1/220/220/22
Nasal CongestionRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders0/221/220/22

Baseline characteristics

Age Continuous
Age Continuous(Years)All Randomized Participants
Mean41.9 ± 14.62
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)All Randomized Participants
Female14
Male9
Mean Plaque Index Score
Mean Plaque Index Score(Score on a scale)All Randomized Participants
Mean3.01 ± 0.34
08

Study locations

1 site
  • GSK Investigational Site
    Fort Wayne, Indiana 46825, United States
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 9, 2013, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01122862
Lead sponsor
GlaxoSmithKline
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
May 13, 2010
Start date
Apr 2010
Primary completion
May 2010
Completion
May 2010
Results posted
Jul 30, 2013
Last update
Sep 9, 2013

Study contacts

GSK Clinical Trials
study director · GlaxoSmithKline

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2013. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion