Effectiveness of Turmeric Oral Rinse Versus Saline Oral Rinse On Oral Mucositis Among Patients Receiving Chemotherapy
Effectiveness of Turmeric Oral Rinse Versus Saline Oral Rinse On Oral Mucositis Among Patients Receiving Chemotherapy
powerful control measures to restrict the threat are critical. 250,000 instances (an envisioned 4 percent of most cancers
Neethu Chandran (2019) occurrence) and sixty-three,500 deaths
unsure. therefore, we finished a scientific take a look at to potential to continue nourishment, Flavors and Self-care
evaluate the effectiveness of oral rinse in stop and alleviating assessment, each complement are having 3 options and score
chemotherapy-caused oral mucositis. based totally mostly on between 1 to 3. information series way: Permission from the
look at quality, 3 of the five randomized managed trials have involved authority; preceding to collection of records,
been protected within the meta-evaluation. The effects permission modified into obtained from handling Director of
confirmed no beneficial results of chlorhexidine conversely cancer area of expertise Centre. length of records collection:
to bacteriostatic water or NaCl 0. nine %. patients charge of The data grow to be accumulated from 01-08-2023 to 26 -09-
poor issue results of chlorhexidine, which includes teeth 2023. The investigator gathered the facts from each
discoloration and flavour modifications in two of the 5 intervention class I and II. Pretest: Pretest changed into
chlorhexidine research. In a single randomized managed trial, carried out earlier than beginning 2d cycle of chemotherapy
the severity of oral mucositis ends up shown to be reduced via remedy thru the usage of countrywide most cancers Institute-
using 30% with the use of povidone-iodine oral rinse in commonplace toxicity criteria- Oral Mucositis grading scale.
assessment to sterile water. these results do now not useful Turmeric oral rinse (interventional group I) oral rinse answer
resource using chlorhexidine oral rinse to prevent oral prepared by means of blending five grams of turmeric powder
mucositis. with 50 ml of water. each time a 50 ml of freshly prepared
turmeric oral rinse answer became administrated 2 instances
Bensinger et al., (2018) primarily based totally a day for four weeks. Saline oral rinse (interventional group
on severity, OM is assessed as tolerable mucositis (grade 1 II) Medicated 50 ml of saline oral rinse solution changed into
and a couple of mucositis) and intolerable mucositis administrated 2 instances an afternoon for 4 weeks. post-test:
(grade 3 and better) (Khanal et al., 2010). In publish take a look at turned into carried out after 29 days of
HNC present way radiotherapy, tolerable mucositis starts off chemotherapy remedy with the aid of the usage of
evolved off advanced in all sufferers and countrywide most cancers Institute-commonplace toxicity -
is viable, intolerable mucositis requires powerful ache contr Oral Mucositis grading scale. Post evaluation: check the
ol, gastrostomy tube, IV line for nutritional supplementation amount of oral mucositis among patient receiving
(Elting et al., 2008). this could additionally result chemotherapy drug before and after turmeric oral rinse in
in discounts in radiotherapy and dose delays, even preventing interventional institution I was analysed via the usage of
planned radiotherapy, consequently complicating the relative frequency distribution. examine the extent of oral
underlying most cancers treatment. mucositis among patient receiving chemotherapy drug earlier
than and after saline oral rinse in class II become analysed by
III. METHODOLOGY means of the use of frequency and percent. evaluate the
effectiveness of turmeric oral wash and Saline oral rinse on
design: The research design selected for the existing oral mucositis amongst patient receiving chemotherapy in
look at became a real interventional research layout turned interventional organization I and II became analysed by using
into selected to evaluate the success of turmeric oral rinse and mean, trendy deviation, mean percentage, paired ‘t’ check
Saline oral rinse on oral mucositis among affected person and unpaired ‘take a look at. find out the affiliation among the
receiving chemotherapy. setting: the prevailing observes post-test rankings of oral mucositis amongst patient receiving
changed into performed at most cancers’ distinctiveness chemotherapy in interventional institution I and II and their
centre. it's far located 30 Kms far from Dhanvantri university selected boxcar variables was analysed via the usage of Chi-
of Nursing. it's far a hundred and fifty bedded private clinic rectangular check.
and has incredibly prepared techniques. An approximately 12
-15 sufferers are receiving chemotherapy treatment. sample:
The samples selected for the present have a look at have been
the sufferers receiving chemotherapy remedy in selected
hospital who have been inclined to take part and gift
throughout the length of statistics collection. sample size: the
overall pattern size changed into 30 cancer sufferers, out of
which 15 patients have been interventional group I and 15
patients were interventional corporation II. Sampling
technique: non probability sampling tactics. improvement of
tool: phase A It consists of boxcar characteristics of patients
receiving chemotherapy, i.e., Age, each sex, cancer stages,
own family history of cancer, period of contamination,
prevalence of taking oral hygiene, life fashion conduct.
section B countrywide most cancers Institute-commonplace
toxicity standards- Oral Mucositis grading scale. it's miles a
standardized device. It includes 13 items such as voice,
consume, mucosa, saliva, Tongue, gums, Lips, Teeth,
IV. RESULTS
Table 1: Relative Frequency Distribution of Interventional Class I and II of Patients Receiving Chemotherapy
According to their Boxcar Variables (N1= 15, N2=15)
S. Intervention Class I Intervention Class II
No Boxcar Variables (N1) (%) (N2) (%)
1. Age in years
20-30 1 7 3 20
31-40 5 33 3 20
41-50 5 33 4 27
Above 65 4 27 5 33
2 Gender
Male 8 53 10 67
Female 7 47 5 33
3. Cancer Stages
Cervical cancer 3 20 3 20
Breast cancer 1 07 1 07
Lung cancer 3 20 2 13
Oral cancer 8 53 9 60
4. Cancer Family history
Yes 6 40 5 27
No 9 60 11 73
5. Frequency of taking oral hygiene
1 time 9 60 10 67
2 times 6 40 5 33
6. Cancer Duration
Less than 6 months 1 07 0 0
6 months – 1 year. 8 53 11 73
1 – 2 yrs 6 40 4 27
Above 2 years 0 0 0 0
7 Manner of living
Smoking 2 13 1 07
Alcohol 4 27 2 13
Chewing items 2 13 2 13
Others 7 47 10 67
Table 2: Relative Frequency Distribution of the Interventional Class I Pre Test and Post Test Scores of Levels of oral Mucositis
among Patient Receiving Chemotherapy (N1=15)
Intervention Class I
Mucositis Level Fore Test Post Test
(N) (%) (N) (%)
No mucositis 0 0 12 80
Mild 0 0 3 20
Moderate 9 60 0 0
Severe 6 40 0 0
Table 3: Relative Frequency Distribution of the Interventional Class II Pre Test and Post Test Scores of Levels of Oral Mucositis
among Patient Receiving Chemotherapy. (N2=15)
Intervention class II
Mucositis Level Fore Test Post Test
(N) (%) (N) (%)
No mucositis 0 0 8 53
Mild 3 20 7 47
Moderate 10 67 0 0
Severe 2 13 0 0
Table 4: Relative Frequency Distribution of the Interventional Class I and II Post Test Scores of Levels of Oral
Mucositis among Patient Receiving Chemotherapy. (N1=15) (N2=15)
Post Test Scores
Mucositis Level Intervention Class I Intervention Class II
(N) (%) (N) (%)
No mucositis 12 80 8 53
Mild 3 20 7 47
Moderate 0 0 0 0
Severe 0 0 0 0
Table 5: Comparison of Mean, Standard Deviation, and Mean Percentage of Level of Oral Mucositis among
Interventional Class I and II Pre and Post Test Scores
Patient receiving Max Fore test Post test Difference in
chemotherapy scores Mean SD Mean % Mean SD Mean % mean %
Intervention class I 39 11.23 1.24 29 34.24 1.28 88 59
Intervention class II 39 9.83 1.33 25 24.07 1.27 61 36
Table 6: Paired ‘t’ Test Value of Fore Test and Post Test Scores of Oral Mucositis in Interventional Class I and II
Patient Receiving Chemotherapy Paired ‘t’ Value Table Value Level of significant (P)
Intervention class I 14.43 2.15 P < 0.05 significant
Intervention class II 8.52 2.15 P < 0.05 significant
Df =14 Table value=2.15 P<0.05 significant
Table 7: Unpaired ‘t’ Test Value of Post Test Scores of Oral Mucositis in Interventional Class I and II
Patients taking chemotherapy Unpaired ‘t’ value Table value Level of significant (P)
Level of oral mucositis 7.42 2.05 P<0.05 Significant
Df=28 Table value=2.05 P<0.05 significant
Table 8: Chi-Square Value of Association Between Intervention Class I Post Test Scores with their Boxcar Variables
Boxcar variables DF 2 Table value Level of significance
Age 1 0.71 3.84 P > 0.05 NS
Gender 1 1.99 3.84 P>0.05 NS
Cancer stages 2 2.51 5.89 P>0.05 NS
Cancer Family history 1 2.82 3.84 P>0.05 NS
Frequency of taking oral hygiene 1 1.46 3.84 P>0.05 NS
Cancer Duration 2 6.51 5.89 P<0.05 significant
Manner of living 1 1.45 3.84 P>0.05 NS
Table 9: Chi-Square Value of Association between Interventional Class II Post Test Scores with their Boxcar Variables
Boxcar Variables DF 2 Table Value Level of Significance
Age 1 0.80 3.84 P > 0.05 NS
Gender 2 0.45 5.89 P>0.05 NS
Cancer Stages 1 0.02 3.84 P>0.05 NS
Cancer Family history 1 0.77 3.84 P>0.05 NS
Frequency of taking oral hygiene 1 2.02 3.84 P>0.05 NS
Cancer Duration 1 1.87 3.84 P<0.05 Significant
Manner of living 2 6.49 5.89 P>0.05 NS
oral rinse seemed to be effective in decreasing the level of observed in mean rating values had been merely coincidental
oral mucositis in patients dealt with chemotherapy (Table 3). and no longer real differences. Chi-square became calculated
to decide the affiliation among the posttest rankings of the
The frequency and percent distribution of the level of experimental organization I patients handled with
mucositis in Intervention organization I and II after the test chemotherapy and their boxcar variables (age, gender, most
amongst patients treated with chemotherapy indicates that in cancers degrees, own family records of cancer, frequency of
Interventional class I, the majority (eighty%) of sufferers had oral hygiene use, period of most cancers, and manner of living
no mucositis and 20% had slight mucositis, while in conduct). It indicates that a sizable association (p<0.05) was
intervention class II, the general public (fifty-three %) of found only in the duration of cancer, while no significant
them had no mucositis and 47% of sufferers had slight association (p>0.05) was determined between the put up-
mucositis. Turmeric oral rinse appeared to be more effective check rankings of the interventional class I in comparison to
than saline oral rinse in decreasing degrees of oral mucositis other boxcar variables together with age, gender, sorts of
in chemotherapy patients. Evaluate the effectiveness of most cancers, family records of most cancers, frequency of
turmeric oral rinse and Saline oral rinse on oral mucositis oral hygiene and manner of living. for that reason, the
amongst patient receiving chemotherapy in Interventional variations determined in imply rating values had been merely
class I and II. The effectiveness of turmeric oral rinse and coincidental and no longer actual variations. (Table 8)
Saline oral rinse become tested with the aid of the usage of
general deviation, mean percent, paired ‘t’ test and unpaired Chi-square was calculated to determine the affiliation
‘t’ check (Table 4)the general mean rating for the pretest between posttest ratings of Interventional class II patients
suggest score turned into eleven.23 ± 1.24, which is 29%, treated with chemotherapy with their boxcar variables (age,
even as within the posttest it become 34.24 ± 1.28, which is gender, most cancers tiers, family history of cancer,
88%, revealing a distinction of 59% in the Intervention class frequency of oral hygiene use, period of most cancers,
I. however, in Intervention class II, the pre-check score manner of living. It shows that a considerable affiliation
became 9.83 ± 1.33, that's 25%, whilst in the put up-check, it (p<0.05) was found only in the duration of cancer, while no
became 24.07 ± 1.27, which is sixty one%, revealing a significant association (p>0.05) turned into found among the
difference of 36%. It indicates that turmeric oral rinse was publish-take a look at rankings of interventional class II in
more effective than saline oral rinse in decreasing the level of comparison to different boxcar variables including age,
oral mucositis in chemotherapy sufferers (Table 5) Paired ‘t’ gender, kinds of most cancers, own family records of most
test become calculated to investigate the effectiveness cancers, frequency of oral hygiene and manner of living. thus,
between pre and submit test ratings of Interventional class I the variations found in suggest score values have been merely
and II on degree of oral mucositis among affected person coincidental and not actual variations. (Table 9)
receiving chemotherapy. The paired ‘t’ takes a look at value
turned into 14. forty-three and 8.52 in Interventional class I VI. CONCLUSION
and II, while in comparison to table value (2.15) each are
high. This shows that there was a sizeable effectiveness The findings showed that the mean post-test rating of
between publish test rankings of degrees of oral mucositis oral mucositis levels in cancer sufferers in Interventional
amongst sufferers receiving chemotherapy in the class I used to be 34.24±1.28, whilst in Interventional class II
Interventional class I and II, (Table 6) the post-test imply rating turned into 24.07±1.27. It shows
that turmeric oral rinse is more powerful than saline oral rinse
Unpaired ‘t’ takes a look at become calculated to in patients receiving chemotherapy. Paired "t" test and
research the effectiveness between Intervention class I and II unpaired "t" check confirmed that in patients receiving
publish test ratings on stage of oral mucositis amongst chemotherapy, turmeric oral rinse turned into greater
patients taking chemotherapy. The unpaired ‘t’ takes a look effective than saline oral rinse for oral mucositis. Chi-square
at price changed into 7. forty-two, when compared to table test showed best the length of most cancers in each class and
cost (2.05, p<0.05), it's far excessive. evidently turmeric oral other boxcar variables have no sizeable association with the
rinse was more powerful than saline oral rinse in decreasing put up-check rating of oral mucositis degree in interventional
degree of oral mucositis amongst sufferers receiving class I and II.
chemotherapy (Table 7)
REFERENCES
Chi-square turned into calculated to determine the
affiliation among the posttest scores of the intervention class [1]. Adrianne Dill Linton, (2007). Introduction to Medical
I sufferers dealt with chemotherapy and their boxcar variables Surgical Nursing (4 Eds). Philadelphia: Elsevier
(age, sex, most cancers degrees, family history of cancer, Science Limited.
frequency of oral hygiene use, duration of cancer, and manner [2]. Alligard, M R (2002), “Nursing Theorists and their
of living conduct). It suggests that a significant affiliation Work”, (5 Eds.,) Mosby company, Philadelphia
(p<0.05) was found only in the duration of cancer, while no [3]. Basavanthappa.B. T, (2003). Medical Surgical
significant association (p>zero.05) was discovered among the Nursing (1 Eds). New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical
post-test ratings of the Interventional class I as compared to Publishers
different boxcar variables consisting of age, gender, kinds of [4]. Basavanthappa. (2007). Nursing Research, (2 Eds).
most cancers, circle of relative’s records of cancer, frequency New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P)
of oral hygiene and manner of living. hence, the differences Ltd.