Narrative review highlights mechanisms of action and clinical indications for mouthwashes, suggesting improved oral health outcomes.
Mechanical plaque control, though fundamental to oral disease prevention, is often limited by patient compliance and skill. This necessitates the adjunctive use of chemotherapeutic mouthwashes to improve oral hygiene. While numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses already exist for specific mouthwash agents such as chlorhexidine or essential oils, there remains a critical need for a consolidated narrative review that synthesizes this extensive information into a practical clinical guide. This article aims to bridge that gap. This review moves beyond a simple summary of existing data by providing a critical, comparative analysis of common mouthwash formulations. It details not only if a mouthwash works but how it works, for whom it is most appropriate, and for how long it should be used. By synthesizing mechanisms of action, pros, cons, and clinical indications for each agent, this review provides an evidence-based framework for integrating mouthwashes into modern dental practice, thereby enhancing preventive oral healthcare. The selection of a mouthwash should be a patient-specific, evidence-based decision, guided by individual needs, risk profile, and tolerance for side effects. The review’s comparative table facilitates informed clinical decision-making.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Joshi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: