Skip to main content
Cureus logoLink to Cureus
. 2022 Jan 9;14(1):e21058. doi: 10.7759/cureus.21058

Effectiveness of Organic and Inorganic Fluoridated Dentifrice on Dental Caries Progression Among Institutionalized Geriatrics: A Randomized Intervention

Arthi Balasubramaniam 1,, Madan Kumar PD 2, Kiran Iyer 3, Dhanraj Ganapathy 4
Editors: Alexander Muacevic, John R Adler
PMCID: PMC8826480  PMID: 35165536

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the effects of two commercially available organic and inorganic fluoridated dentifrices on dental caries progression amongst the institutionalized geriatric population.

Materials and methods

A total of 80 participants were selected and randomly allocated using the coin toss method into two groups, viz. Group I with subjects receiving organic fluoridated dentifrice and Group II with subjects receiving inorganic fluoridated dentifrice. Allocation concealment was done using the Sequentially-Numbered, Opaque, Sealed Envelopes (SNOSE) method. Participants were blinded using analogous dentifrice tubes. They brushed their teeth with the dentifrices twice daily using the modified Bass technique for a period of six months. Their compliance with the intervention was monitored regularly. The outcome measure was susceptibility to dental caries assessed by a cariogram. A single, trained, and calibrated investigator assessed the cariogram at baseline and after six months. Collected data were compiled and analyzed.

Results

The mean age was found to be 67.75 ± 4.1 years, 70.05 ±7.4 years among Group I and Group II participants, respectively. The results showed that the efficacy of avoiding new carious lesions was higher (75.85%) in Group I participants as compared to Group II (73.4%) participants, but no significant difference in the mean cariogram sectors was observed. However, there was a statistically significant reduction in the Streptococcus (S.) mutans and Lactobacillus colony-forming unit (CFU) (p<0.05) with a considerable increase in salivary pH in Group I participants.

Conclusion

There is a marked increase in the possibility of avoiding new carious lesions with a reduction in S. mutans and Lactobacillus CFU and an increase in saliva buffer capacity over six months of use of organic fluoride dentifrices. Thus, organic fluoride dentifrice can be an effective agent for institutionalized geriatrics in the prevention of dental caries and oral diseases.

Keywords: cariogram, caries risk, organic fluoride, saliva, institutionalized elderly

Introduction

The demographic change with the increase in the elderly population (≥ 60 years) globally has resulted in a marked increase in the number of geriatric institutions. Health becomes a major concern among the elderly in old age homes since it requires special attention on health care delivery [1]. Oral conditions, inclusive of dental caries, periodontal disease, and partial and complete edentulism, are common among geriatrics. These conditions can unfavorably alter dietary consumption and nutritional status thereby affecting general health and quality of life [2]. According to a survey of institutionalized seniors in Delhi, 39.2% remained edentulous, 44.9% had decaying teeth, and 57.9% had extensive periodontal disease [3]. Also, a survey among institutionalized elderly in Chennai showed a 67.3% prevalence of dental caries and a 51.3% prevalence of periodontal disease [4].

This higher frequency of dental caries as well as periodontitis in the elderly suggests that minimizing the oral health strain and enhancing the oral health-related quality of life among institutionalized elders should be a priority. Institutionalized elderly populations have various barriers in availing dental health care services. The barriers include their perception of economic burden to their children in spending on dental treatment, constrained access to dental health services in old age homes [5], fear of dental procedures (injection, noise) [6], transportation difficulties, and lack of knowledge on oral hygiene practices [7]. Therefore, an interest in preventive measures of dental diseases among institutionalized elderly is needed, which may help them overcome these barriers. Evidence has shown a reasonable effect of fluorides in the prevention of dental caries [8]. Fluoridated dentifrices, which are inexpensive and widely available, have been proven to be beneficial in preventing dental cavities [9-10]. Organic fluoride diminishes surface tension, enhances fluoride absorption, and improves remineralization of early caries by its amphiphilic character, which is characterized by hydrophobic and hydrophilic components within a single molecule [11]. Also, organic fluoride reduces dental plaque adhesiveness because of the higher affinity of hydrophilic counter-ions to the enamel surface. Organic fluorides are characterized to spread to all the surfaces in the oral cavity quickly due to their tenside property, showing longer clearance of dental plaque and food particles in the oral cavity. Organic fluorides are found to be highly bacteriostatic and bactericidal since they are strongly glycolytic in nature for three to six hours on its application, thereby reducing acid production in the dental plaque and impeding supragingival plaque growth [12]. The administration of amine fluoride dentifrice and mouth rinse lowered the caries incidence, plaque, and gingival indices in clinical research including people of various ages [13-15]. Though inorganic fluorides have proven to be effective against dental caries with their anti-microbial characteristics, they fail to reduce dental plaque adhesiveness and its clearance due to its very meager affinity of hydrophilic counter-ions to the enamel surface [16].

However, there are no clear trials to show organic fluoride effectively helps in minimizing the risk factors for caries in the elderly population. As a result, the current study was designed to examine the effects of two commercially available organic and inorganic fluoridated toothpaste on dental caries risk factors amongst Chennai's institutionalized elderly community.

Materials and methods

This experimental study was conducted in an old age institution in East Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, for a period of about six months, in five stages: sample size estimation, participant recruitment, calibration of the examiner, data collection, and checking for compliance. An interventional randomized study design, in accordance with the Helsinki guidelines on ethical parameters, was adopted and the study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. This study was registered in the Clinical Trials Registry - India (REF/2017/11/015967). The study was clearly explained to the participants and informed consent was obtained.

The enrolled respondents were over 60 years old, of both genders, and had lived in an institutional setting for at least a year prior to the beginning of the study. They also intended to stay at the institution for at least another year after the commencement of the research. They possessed a minimum of 10 natural teeth. Participants with uncontrolled diabetes, smoking, severe systemic diseases, and who lacked manual dexterity to perform tooth brushing and availed of any dental services recently were excluded from the study. The sample size was estimated using nPower Software (San Diego, CA) with a margin of error of 5%, which suggested a minimum of 65 participants with 80% power. Sample size was calculated using the formula n = [(Zα/2 + Z β)2 × (S.D)2]/ (μ1 - μ2)2. To adjust for any potential dropouts, a total of 80 participants were enlisted and randomly allocated using the coin toss method into two groups, viz. Group I (receiving organic fluoridated dentifrice) and 40 participants in Group II (receiving inorganic fluoridated dentifrice). Allocation concealment was done using the Sequentially-Numbered, Opaque, Sealed Envelopes (SNOSE) method. Participants were blinded using analogous dentifrice tubes. They used the dentifrices twice daily once in the morning and night using the modified Bass brushing method as instructed for a period of six months. There was no loss of follow-up (Figure 1). A single investigator, well-trained, and calibrated observed caries and related outcomes and used cariogram software for analysis [17].

Figure 1. Study Flow Chart.

Figure 1

The following outcome measures were evaluated. Participants’ demographic profiles and cariogram model factors with a computer-based calculation in the form of a pie chart were investigated. The cariogram model factors include past caries experience, plaque amount, general related diseases, diet content and frequency, Streptococcus (S.) ​​​​​​mutans count, fluoride program, salivary buffer capacity. The Decayed - Missing - Filled Surface index proposed by Klein, Palmer, and Knutson in 1938 and the plaque index chartered by Silness and Loe in 1964 was recorded for caries experience and plaque accumulation. During a five-minute chewing session on a strip of paraffin wax, stimulated saliva was gathered in the measuring container after two hours of their breakfast. Salivary buffer capacity was assessed using a digital pH meter. The stimulated saliva was cultured in mitis salivarius and Rogosa SL agar for S. mutans (MS) (Figure 2) and Lactobacillus count (LB) (Figure 3), respectively. The agar substrates were soaked with the stimulated saliva and then incubated for 48 and 96 hours, respectively, at 37 degrees Celsius. The MS and LB counts were divided into four categories, with 0 = 0-103, 1 = 103 -104, 2 = 105 -106, 3 = > 106 CFU/ml for MS and 0 = 0-102, 1 = 102 -103, 2 = 104 -105, 3 = > 105 CFU/ml for LB.

Figure 2. Streptococcus (S.) mutans Culture.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Lactobacillus Culture.

Figure 3

To ensure that all of the participants in Groups I and II had the same plaque score, they were given thorough oral prophylaxis before the initiation of the study. After finishing oral prophylaxis, the participants received toothpaste and a toothbrush, and they were instructed to abstain from using other oral hygiene equipment throughout the period of the study. The cariogram model factors listed above were evaluated at baseline and after six months.

Each day, an observation sheet with dawn and night columns was handed to the participants, and they were asked to make a checkmark in the appropriate column after cleaning their teeth. The residential nursing assistant was in charge of this, and the investigator checked up on it once a week. Participants who did not clean their teeth twice a day were strongly advised to brush their teeth twice a day. All the participants enrolled in the study completed it, and there were no dropouts during the study period. All data were analyzed using SPSS, Version 23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The mean age was found to be 67.75 ± 4.1 years; 70.05 ±7.4 years among Group I and Group II participants, respectively. Most of the participants were uneducated in both groups (55%). The participants in both groups had a minimum of 10 natural teeth and a maximum of 32 natural teeth. The comparison of the mean percentage of the green, yellow, red, light blue, and dark blue sectors between the two groups showed no significant difference (p>0.05) (Table 1). However, there was a statistically significant difference in all sectors within the groups (I and II) at baseline and after six months (p <0.05). Figure 4 (A, B) shows the cariogram pie chart at six months for Group I and Group II. The green sector represents the mean chance of avoiding new caries, yellow sector (general diseases), light blue sector (fluoride program and salivary buffer capacity), red sector (S. mutans and plaque amount), and dark blue sector (Lactobacillus count).

Table 1. Comparison of cariogram sectors such as green, yellow, light blue, red, and dark blue between and within two groups.

* Unpaired t-test; # Paired t-test

Variables Timeline Mean ±SD p-Value
Group I Group II
Green Sector At baseline 59.93 ± 11.1 59.38 ± 15.7 0.852*
At 6 months 75.85 ± 8.28 73.40 ±15.6 0.384*
p-value 0.000# 0.000#
Yellow Sector At baseline 4.15 ± 1.51 3.85 ± 1.49 0.300*
At 6 months 3.78 ±1.38 3.50 ± 1.41 0.275*
p-value 0.001 0.011
Light Blue Sector At baseline 14.35 ± 9.71 16.93 ± 8.64 0.396*
At 6 months 11.65 ± 4.11 15.18 ± 7.24 0.137*
p-value 0.030# 0.021#
Red Sector At baseline 7.55 ± 4.42 11.33 ± 4.82 0.231*
At 6 months 4.15 ± 4.81 6.03 ± 4.34 0.141*
p-value 0.000# 0.000#
Dark Blue Sector At baseline 8.83 ± 1.10 15.2 ± 1.23 0.157*
At 6 months 1.65 ± 1.70 1.40 ± 0.98 0.424*
p-value 0.000# 0.000#

Figure 4. Post-intervention cariogram chart.

Figure 4

A. For Group I; B. For Group I

There was a statistically significant high reduction in the mean S. mutans, Lactobacillus CFU/ml, and plaque score in Group I compared to Group II participants (p <0.05). Also, there was a slight increase in the mean salivary pH in Group I at six months when compared to that of Group II (p <0.05) (Table 2).

Table 2. Comparison of mean Streptococcus (S.) mutans, Lactobacillus colony-forming unit (CFU)/ml, plaque score, and salivary pH between and within two groups.

* Unpaired t-test; # Paired t-test

Variables Timeline Mean ±SD p-Value
Group I Group II
S.mutans At baseline 9.3x105 ± 3.7x105 5.5x105 ± 2.6x105 0.000*
At 6 months 1.2x103 ± 0.5x103 3.1x103 ± 1.4x103 0.000*
p-value 0.000# 0.000#
Lactobacillus At baseline 2.4x105 ± 2x105 3.6x105 ± 2.2x105 0.000*
At 6 months 7.4x102 ± 1x102 2.5x103 ± 1.4x103 0.000*
p-value 0.000# 0.000#
Plaque score At baseline 1.69 ± 0.85 1.54 ± 0.97 0.491*
At 6 months 1.29 ± 0.74 1.21 ±0.78 0.155*
p-value 0.000 0.000
Salivary pH At baseline 6.82 ± 0.31 7.15 ± 0.48 0.001*
At 6 months 6.93 ± 0.27 6.84 ± 0.38 0.248*
p-value 0.017 0.000

Discussion

The results obtained showed a marked increase in the probability of minimizing the occurrence of new cavities in Group I with organic fluoride compared to Group II using inorganic fluoride dentifrice. This finding was similar to the study that reported the number of new lesions on the upper anterior teeth in the AmF/SnF2 group was 13 compared to 20 new lesions in the NaF group in orthodontic patients [18].

There is a high reduction in salivary cariogenic bacteria such as S. mutans and Lactobacillus in organic fluoride dentifrice compared to inorganic fluoridated dentifrice. The decrement in CFU/ml observed in the survey was consistent with a trial that observed, over the course of two months, the amine fluoride solution group significantly reduced the mean stimulated salivary CFU/ml of S. mutans from 105 to 103 CFU/ml while the sodium fluoride gel group significantly increased the mean stimulated salivary CFU/ml of Lactobacillus from 105 to 104 [19].

A six-week clinical investigation involving 34 healthy young adults found that using organic fluoride toothpaste reduced salivary secretion while increasing salivary buffering capacity [20]. Despite the fact that there was no substantial difference in mean saliva secretion rate between the two groups in this study, there was an upsurge in salivary buffering capacity and considerable reduction in the risk of caries as assessed by the cariogram model with the organic fluoride group.

Several studies have shown that amine fluoride is more efficient than sodium fluoride in suppressing tooth plaque and bacterial adhesion [18,21-22]. However, the present study did not observe any marked difference in the mean plaque amount between the two groups. This contradiction could be attributed since plaque accumulation in cariogram software used in this study was assessed using the Silness and Loe method, which relied on optical observation instead of using the disclosing agents.

This study investigated alterations in caries risk in the institutionalized geriatric population after a fluoride-based preventative program. Also, the dispensation and use of the fluoride dentifrices were regularly monitored. This study assessed all the risk factors in the cariogram model. The limitation of this study could be the solitary geriatric institution. Diet, individual susceptibility to tooth degradation due to microtoxins, and salivary modifiers could be the possible confounding variables in the study. However, since the diet was standardized in the geriatric homes and the subjects were selected on strict inclusion criteria and were randomly allocated thereafter, the role of these confounders was deemed negligible. Hence, further extensive multicenter trials in different parts of the globe should be initiated to understand the effects better. Severe metabolic disorders can possibly alter this outcome in the clinical scenario. More extensive interventions can be attempted in the geriatric population with systemic diseases to understand the impact of fluoridated dentifrices in those vulnerable groups.

Conclusions

The present study throws light on the potential use of organic fluoride for the prevention of the risk factors of dental caries among the institutionalized geriatric population. The overall study results showed that the mean chance to avoid new cavities was high in organic fluoride dentifrice compared to inorganic fluoride dentifrice. There was a reduction in mean cariogenic bacteria (S. mutans and Lactobacillus), the potential risk factor of dental caries, and there was an increase in the salivary buffer capacity on the use of organic fluoride dentifrice compared to the use of inorganic fluoride dentifrice among the geriatric population.

The content published in Cureus is the result of clinical experience and/or research by independent individuals or organizations. Cureus is not responsible for the scientific accuracy or reliability of data or conclusions published herein. All content published within Cureus is intended only for educational, research and reference purposes. Additionally, articles published within Cureus should not be deemed a suitable substitute for the advice of a qualified health care professional. Do not disregard or avoid professional medical advice due to content published within Cureus.

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Human Ethics

Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Ragas Dental College and Hospital issued approval 20160303. This dissertation topic titled " Effectiveness of Organic and Inorganic Fluoridated Dentifrice on Dental Caries Progression among Institutionalized Geriatrics – A Randomized Intervention" submitted by Dr. B. Arthi, has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Ragas Dental College and Hospital

Animal Ethics

Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue.

References

  • 1.Health-care of elderly: determinants, needs and services. Shrivastava SR, Shrivastava PS, Ramasamy J. http://ijpm.mui.ac.ir/index.php/ijpm/article/view/1237/1606. Int J Prev Med. 2013;4:1224–1225. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Quality of life related to tooth loss and prosthetic replacements among persons with dependency and functional limitations. Lantto A, Lundqvist R, Wårdh I. Acta Odontol Scand. 2020;78:173–180. doi: 10.1080/00016357.2019.1668054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Oral health status and treatment need among institutionalized elderly in India. Shaheen SS, Kulkarni S, Doshi D, Reddy S, Reddy P. Indian J Dent Res. 2015;26:493–499. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.172045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Oral healthcare needs of the institutionalized ageing population in Tamil Nadu. Anu V, Avanthika K, Angeline B, Rachel JB. Natl Med J India. 2020;33:83–85. doi: 10.4103/0970-258X.310983. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Assessment of oral health needs, functional ability, barriers and utilization of oral health services among the inmates of old age homes of Hyderabad. Reddy PP, Anjum MS, Rao KY, Monica M, Akula S, Deepthi N. Dentistry. 2018;8:11. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Dental service utilization: patterns and barriers among rural elderly in Guntur district, Andhra Pradesh. Bommireddy VS, Koka KM, Pachava S, Sanikommu S, Ravoori S, Chandu VC. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:0–7. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/17834.7456. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Barriers to oral health care utilization in Ibadan, South West Nigeria. Ajayi DM, Arigbede AO. Afr Health Sci. 2012;12:507–513. doi: 10.4314/ahs.v12i4.17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Fluoride revolution and dental caries: evolution of policies for global use. Whelton HP, Spencer AJ, Do LG, Rugg-Gunn AJ. J Dent Res. 2019;98:837–846. doi: 10.1177/0022034519843495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Oral health in the elderly patient and its impact on general well-being: a nonsystematic review. Gil-Montoya JA, de Mello AL, Barrios R, Gonzalez-Moles MA, Bravo M. Clin Interv Aging. 2015;10:461–467. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S54630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Addressing geriatric oral health concerns through national oral health policy in India. Singh A, Purohit BM. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015;4:39–42. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2014.126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Clinical effect of stannous fluoride and amine fluoride containing oral hygiene products: a 4-year randomized controlled pilot study. Frese C, Wohlrab T, Sheng L, Kieser M, Krisam J, Wolff D. Sci Rep. 2019;9:7681. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-44164-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Experiences with amine fluoride containing products in the management of dental hard tissue lesions focusing on Hungarian studies: a review. Madléna M. Acta Med Acad. 2013;42:189–197. doi: 10.5644/ama2006-124.86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Effects of dentifrices differing in fluoride compounds on artificial enamel caries lesions in vitro. Wierichs RJ, Zelck H, Doerfer CE, Appel P, Paris S, Esteves-Oliveira M, Meyer-Lueckel H. Odontology. 2017;105:36–45. doi: 10.1007/s10266-016-0233-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.In situ remineralisation of enamel and dentin after the use of an amine fluoride mouthrinse in addition to twice daily brushings with amine fluoride toothpaste. Laheij AM, van Strijp AJ, van Loveren C. Caries Res. 2010;44:260–266. doi: 10.1159/000314673. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.High-fluoride toothpaste: a multicenter randomized controlled trial in adults. Srinivasan M, Schimmel M, Riesen M, et al. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2014;42:333–340. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Evaluation of clinical effects of amine fluoride/stannous fluoride containing toothpaste and mouthrinse [Article in Hu] Madléna M, Gintner Z, Bánóczy J, Dombi C. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16468483/ Fogorv Sz. 2005;98:229–232. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Dental caries: intervened - interrupted - interpreted. Concluding remarks and cariography. Bratthall D. Eur J Oral Sci. 1996;104:486–491. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1996.tb00117.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.A prospective, randomized clinical study on the effects of an amine fluoride/stannous fluoride toothpaste/mouthrinse on plaque, gingivitis and initial caries lesion development in orthodontic patients. Øgaard B, Alm AA, Larsson E, Adolfsson U. Eur J Orthod. 2006;28:8–12. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cji075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine, sodium fluoride, fluoride with essential oils, alum, green tea, and garlic with lime mouth rinses on cariogenic microbes. Thomas A, Thakur S, Mhambrey S. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2015;5:302–308. doi: 10.4103/2231-0762.161759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Bacterial viability in oral biofilm after tooth brushing with amine fluoride or sodium fluoride. Naumova EA, Weber L, Pankratz V, Czenskowski V, Arnold WH. Arch Oral Biol. 2019;97:91–96. doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2018.10.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Influence of pure fluorides and stannous ions on the initial bacterial colonization in situ. Kirsch J, Hannig M, Winkel P, et al. Sci Rep. 2019;9:18499. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-55083-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Effect of different fluoridated dentifrices on salivary pH and fluoride content. Cămărășan A, Fazakas Z, Cerghizan D, Balogh-Sămărghițan V, Székely M. https://actamedicamarisiensis.ro/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/2012-6-5.pdf Acta Med Marisiensis. 2012;58:374–376. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Cureus are provided here courtesy of Cureus Inc.

RESOURCES