Successful Methods for Toothbrush Sanitation: An In-Vitro Study pf Common Disinfectant’s Effects on Escherichia Coli Viability
2017
- 96Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage96
- Abstract Views96
Artifact Description
Toothbrush hygiene has received little attention for its role in human oral health. Untreated toothbrushes in holders in normal bathroom settings have been implicated in causing repeated infections of the mouth. Research has indicated that toothbrushes in regular use can become heavily contaminated with various microorganisms. Patients with suppressed immune systems are at great risk for infection. Thus, this study aims to examine various methods for toothbrush sanitation. Because of the proximity to potential aerosols released from toilette flushing, Escherichia coli (E. coli). was used to test the effectiveness of various treatments. Sterile toothbrushes were contaminated by a standardized suspension of E. coli In order to determine the most effective tooth brush treatment the following disinfectants were tested: 20% concentrated salt water, 3% hydrogen peroxide, Listerine, 5% white vinegar and tap water (control group). Bacterial colony counts were obtained from Petrifilm E. coli/Coliform count plates. Colony forming units per toothbrush of E. coli after disinfection were compared by One- way Analysis of Variance and Turkey-Kramer test for multiple comparisons. Results revealed 3% hydrogen peroxide, 30% white vinegar and 20% sodium chloride to be most effective at lowering E. coli viable counts when compared to control and other disinfection methods viability. Statistically lower numbers for the hydrogen peroxide and vinegar treatments, with NaCl showing some significant drop in viability were indicated. Although susceptible to these treatments, common mouthwash was similar to water controls. More studies should be completed with easily assessable, non-toxic antimicrobial agents to determine a standardized home disinfection routine.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know