↓ Skip to main content

Viability and Effects on Bacterial Proteins by Oral Rinses with Hypochlorous Acid as Active Ingredient.

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Dental Journal, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Viability and Effects on Bacterial Proteins by Oral Rinses with Hypochlorous Acid as Active Ingredient.
Published in
Brazilian Dental Journal, October 2015
DOI 10.1590/0103-6440201300388
Pubmed ID
Authors

Castillo, Diana Marcela, Castillo, Yormaris, Delgadillo, Nathaly Andrea, Neuta, Yineth, Jola, Johana, Calderón, Justo Leonardo, Lafaurie, Gloria Inés

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of hypochlorous acid (HOCl) rinses and chlorhexidine (CHX) on the bacterial viability of S. mutans, A. israelii, P. gingivalis, A. actinomycetemcomitans, E. corrodens, C. rectus, K. oxytoca, K. pneumoniae and E. cloacae. The percentage of live bacteria was tested by fluorescence method using Live/Dead kit(r) and BacLight (Molecular Probes(r)) and compared between groups by the Kruskal-Wallis and U Mann-Whitney tests with Bonferroni correction (p value<0.012). The effect of HOCl and CHX on total proteins of P. gingivalis and S. mutans was determined by SDS-PAGE. CHX showed a higher efficacy than HOCl against S. mutans, A. israelii, E. corrodens and E. cloacae (p<0.001) while HOCl was more effective than CHX against P. gingivalis, A. actinomycetemcomitans, C. rectus and K. oxytoca (p=0.001). CHX and HOCl had similar efficacy against K. pneumoniae. Proteins of P. gingivalis and S. mutans were affected similarly by HOCl and CHX. HOCl reduced the bacterial viability especially in periodontopathic bacteria, which may support its use in the control of subgingival biofilm in periodontal patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 5 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Student > Master 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 December 2015.
All research outputs
#5,757,573
of 6,737,133 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Dental Journal
#17
of 31 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,758
of 283,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Dental Journal
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,737,133 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.7. This one scored the same or higher as 14 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 283,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them