The antibacterial efficiency of dental powder, toothpastes, mouth rinses, charcoal, table salt and chewing sticks against Streptococcus and Lactobacillus acidophilus

Abstract

Chewing sticks and other means of obtaining oral health are widely used throughout Africa. But how does the usage of materials compare to the conventional use of fluoride toothpastes for oral hygiene? The aim of the study was to comparatively evaluate the antibacterial efficacy of traditional oral care practices (chewing sticks, dental powders, mouth washes, table salt, and charcoal) and conventional toothpaste against two bacteria strains of public health significance. Standard microbiological and analytical methods were used.  Lactobacillus acidophilus ATCC 314TM and Streptococcus mutans ATCC 25175were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection Centre and appropriately reactivated. The stem cuttings of chewing stick (Zanthoxylum zanthoxyloides and Massularia acuminata) were extracted using Soxhlet apparatus. Antibacterial activity of the extracts were  done using a modified Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion technique, the minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration were carried out using micro dilution technique of double fold dilution. Antibacterial susceptibility testing was done and multiple antibiotic resistance index of the bacterial strain was evaluated thereafter. The results showed that the toothpaste sample labelled B had the highest zone of inhibition (18.00±0.10 cm) and (21.00±0.87 cm) in at a 100% concentration for L. acidophilus and S. mutans respectively. The two chewing stick samples used in the study had antibacterial activity at 100 % concentration for both strains. The mouthwash used in the study tend to have the highest antibacterial activity against S. mutans and L. acidophilus having a diameter (mm) zone of inhibition 26.00±0.20 cm and 24.00±0.95 cm at 100 % concentration respectively. Mouth wash sample met the Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute criterion for reporting the result as sensitive ≥20. Gentamicin, Cefazidime and Meropenem were sensitive to both S. mutans ATCC®25175 and L. acidophilus ATCC®314. Both bacterial strains used in the study had an index greater than 0.2 which symbolizes that they are of public health importance.