Experimental Research Into Antibacterial Effect Of Different Gargles Towards Bacteria In The Mouth

Objective This paper is to investigate and explore the antibacterial effects of differentgargles to Candida albicans, Enterococcus faecium, E.faecalis, and Pseudomonasaeruginosa, in order to provide basis for selecting corresponding mouthwash for patientsof chemotherapy-induced oral infection.Methods Common clinical Candida albicans(C. albicans), Enterococcus faecium(E.faecium), Enterococcus faecalis(E.faecalis), and pseudomonas aeruginosa(P. aeruginosa)were seen as the research subjects in this experiment, which were divided into theexperimental group and the control group respectively.0.5%povidone-iodinesolution(PVP-I),0.02%chlorhexidine acetate solution, compound chlorhexid-inemouthwash and0.1%cetylpyridinium chloride gargle(CPC) were used respectively inthe experimental group to observe four gargle liquid antibacterial effects, andphysiological saline was used in the control group. By virtue of tablet coating method,four kinds of mouthwashes treated different bacterial for3minutes respectively, so as toanalyze and compare the antibacterial effects of four kinds of mouthwash to C.albicans,E.faecium, E.faecalis, and p.aeruginosa.Results Antibacterial effects of the experimental group compared with the control groupwere significant differences (P<0.05), In the experiment the antibacterial extent of fourkinds of mouthwash on C.albicans E.faecium, E.faecalis, and P.aeruginosa were thefollowing results: In the experiment of C.albicans, the0.5%povidone-iodine solution compared with the compound chlorhexidine mouthwash were not statistical significance(P>0.05), however, their colony counts were significantly lower than those of the othertwo mouthwashes after the effects of the0.5%povidone-iodine solution and compoundchlorhexidine mouthwash, and there were significant differences(P<0.05). In theexperiment of E.faecium, the colony counts were significantly lower than those of theother three mouthwashes after the effects of the0.5%povidone-iodine solution, andthere were significant differences (P<0.05). In the experiment of E.faecalis,0.5%povidone-iodine solution compared with the0.1%cetylpyridinium gargle were notstatistical significance (P>0.05), but the colony counts were significantly lower thanthose of the other two mouthwashes after the effects of the0.5%povidone-iodinesolution and0.1%cetylpyridinium chloride gargle, and there were significantdifferences(P<0.05). In the experiment of P.aeruginosa, the colony counts weresignificantly lower than those of the other three mouthwashes after the effects of the0.5%povidone-iodine solution, and there were significant differences (P<0.05). Theoverall trend of the antibacterial activity of0.5%povidone-iodine solution was betterthan the0.02%chlorhexidine acetate solution, the compound chlorhexidine gargle and0.1%cetylpyridinium chloride gargle at the same time on the four kinds of bacteria.Conclusion Mouthwashes in the experimental group have various degree of inhibitionto the four kinds of bacterias. Moreover, the inhibitory effects of different mouthwash todifferent bacteria have differences: the antibacterial effects of the0.5%povidone-iodinesolution and the compound chlorhexidine mouthwash were the most obvious effect onC.albicans. The antibacterial activity of0.5%povidone-iodine solution on E.faecium,was the best in all the mouthwashes. The antibacterial activity of0.5%povidone-iodinesolution and0.1%cetylpyridinium chloride gargle were the most obvious effect onE.faecalis. The antibacterial activity of0.5%povidone-iodine solution on P.aeruginosa,was the best in all the mouthwash. It also indicated that0.5%povidone-iodine solution had broader antibacterial spectrum, and showed effective antibacterial effects to all fourkinds of bacteria. It was recommended that performing oral care should select targetedmouthwash according to the sensitivity of each mouthwash, so as to improve the qualityof oral nursing.