Article reposted from medical community journal Oral Health by Dr. Janice Goodman and Herb Moskowitz
Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) was f irst introduced into clinical practice in 1954.1 In its more than 70 years of clinical use, it has become a standard of care in infection control, globally. CHX oral rinse has earned the American Dental Association’s Seal of Acceptance
and has been a valuable adjunct in the control of periodontal disease for decades. But has it outlived its usefulness? Let’s compare the features and benef its of CHX to a current state-of the-art antiseptic agent, molecular iodine (I2), that is currently being introduced into Canada so that you can answer that question. Just because an antiseptic agent has
earned prominence as a standard of care, doesn’t mean that it will always retain that distinction. For example, during the 1930’s and early 1940’s, sulfa drugs were considered the standard of care as antibiotic agents. With the large-scale introduction of penicillin in 1945, sulfa was no longer considered the antibiotic of choice.2 Consider your own practice today.
