AIM: To evaluate resting tongue position in recently extracted and long term completely edentulous patients, and to evaluate the efficacy of achieving retracted tongue position by simple modification in complete denture along with certain tongue exercises.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 62 study subjects were classified into two groups based on duration of edentulousness. Group A: Recently extracted completely edentulous subjects (<1 year), Group B: Long term completely edentulous subjects (>1-10 year). The patients with retracted tongue position were subjected to a simple modification in complete denture along with inclusion of certain tongue exercises. After eight months patients were recalled and evaluated. The data was analysed using SPSS statistical tests like mean, standard deviation, proportion, Chi square test and McNemar Test.
RESULTS: Among the study subjects, 54.9% had retracted tongue position. Group B showed high proportion of retracted tongue position (68.8%) as compared to Group A. After the intervention, 42.8% study subjects gained normal resting tongue position.
CONCLUSION: Long term completely edentulous subjects presented retracted tongue position in higher percentage when compared to the recently extracted group. The interventional method employed for the subjects with retracted tongue position, played a significant role to assume normal resting tongue position and showed improvement in denture stability and retention.
METHODS: A double-blind, parallel-group randomised controlled trial was carried out. The intervention group received oral care with chlorhexidine 0.2%, while the control group received routine oral care with thymol. Nurses provided oral care with assigned solutions of 20 mL once daily over seven days. Oral cavity assessment using the Brief Oral Health Status Examination form was performed before each oral care procedure. Data on medication received and the subsequent development of aspiration pneumonia was recorded. An oral swab was performed on Day 7 to obtain specimens to test for colonisation.
RESULTS: The final sample consisted of 35 (control) and 43 (intervention) patients. Chlorhexidine was effective in reducing oral colonisation compared to routine oral care with thymol (p < 0.001). The risk of oral bacterial colonisation was nearly three times higher in the thymol group compared to the chlorhexidine group.
CONCLUSION: The use of chlorhexidine 0.2% significantly reduced oral colonisation and is recommended as an easier and more cost-effective alternative for oral hygiene.