Periodontal Health Among Cigarette, Electronic Cigarettes, and Narghile Smokers
Trial statusRecruiting
Trial phaseNot listed
Trial typeObservational
Biological sexAll
Age18-25
SponsorAl-Hawash Private University
About this trial
This study compares the different effects of traditional cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and narghile on periodontal health among a sample of Al-Hawash Private University students. The main question it aims to answer is: Are there statistically significant differences in periodontal parameters among different types of smokers?
Eligibility criteria
This trial does not accept healthy volunteersQualifiers
Cigarette smokers: Individuals who have smoked five or more cigarettes per day for at least one year.
E-cigarette smokers: Individuals who have smoked e-cigarettes one or more times per day for at least one year.
narghile smokers: Individuals who have used a hookah one or more times per day for at least one year.
Disqualifiers
Non-smokers
Ages older than 25 years
Dual smokers: Individuals who smoke two or more types of tobacco.
Individuals with systemic diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease, liver problems, and kidney disease
Trial population
Smoker students at Al-Hawash Private University
Trial design
Design model
Case-control
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Treatments tested in this trial
Non-Interventional Study
Other interventionNon-Interventional Study
Treatment groups
90 Participants
are divided into 3 treatment groupsGroup A: Cigarette Smokers1 intervention
Group B: E-cigarette Smokers1 intervention
Group C: Narghile Smokers1 intervention
Trial outcomes
Primary outcomes
1
Plaque Index (PI)
Plaque Index (PI) The PI was evaluated according to the Silness and Löe (1964) system. This system assesses the plaque thickness at the tooth cervical margin (closest to the gum) and has four scores: 0: no plaque; 1. a film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin which is nonvisible and it can be scraped from the tooth surface using a probe; 2. moderate accumulation of soft deposits within the gingival pocket or between the tooth and the gingival margin; 3. abundance of soft matter within the gingival pocket and/or on the tooth and the gingival margin. The presence of visible dental plaque was recorded on the four sites (vestibular, lingual, mesial, and distal) of all the teeth, except the third molars. three PI classes (PI%; \[0-1\[; \[1-2\[; \[2-3\]) were arbitrarily defined
Time frame
At enrollment2
Gingival Index (GI)
The gingival status was evaluated using the method of Löe and Silness (1963). The GI score perfectly evaluates the marginal and inter proximal tissues separately on the basis of the following three criteria (Löe \& Silness, 1963): 0: no inflammation, healthy gingiva; 1. mild inflammation, slight change in color, slight edema, no bleeding on pressure; 2. moderate inflammation, moderate glazing, red ness, bleeding on pressure; 3. severe inflammation, marked redness and hypertrophy, ulceration, tendency to spontaneous bleeding.
Time frame
At enrollment3
Probing Pocket Depth (PPD)
PPD is the distance between the gingival margin and the apical depth of the periodontal probe tip penetration. The depth of the sulci or pockets was probed using a Williams periodontal probe with markings 1, 2, 3, 5,7,8, 9, 10 mm. The clinical measurements were based on the four sites (buccal, mesial, distal, and lingual) of all the teeth, except the third molars (Natto et al., 2005b).
Time frame
At enrollment4
Clinical Attachment Level (CAL)
Clinical attachment level (CAL) is measured from the cementoenamel junction to the bottom of the sulcus or pocket at the four sites. The mean is then calculated for each patient.
Time frame
At enrollmentSponsors and contacts
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
Source ClinicalTrials.gov