Keywords
Povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine, labeling, assay, post-market surveillance
Povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine, labeling, assay, post-market surveillance
Oral diseases, such as periodontal disease and dental caries, are a health burden to about 3.5 billion people in the world.1 If untreated, there is a likelihood of complete loss of primary or permanent teeth.2 Bacteria, such as Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus, which convert sugars in food residues into acids, are responsible for dental caries. The production and accumulation of these acids may lead to the dematerialization of hard tooth structures, such as enamel, dentine, and cementum. Moreover, some bacteria, including Porphyromonas gingivalis and Treponema denticola, are responsible for periodontal disease associated with inflammatory responses leading to gum detachment.3
Several antiplaque agents are commercially available, mainly as mouth rinses and gargles, to prevent and treat dental caries and periodontal diseases.4,5 These agents include halogens, surfactants, essential oils, metal salts, phenols, plant extracts, oxygenating agents, alcohols, and enzymes.6
Povidone-iodine (halogen) and chlorhexidine (surfactant) are the most common antiplaque agents in the Kenyan market, formulated as mouth rinses/mouthwashes and gargles. Povidone-iodine (halogen) is a polymer complex of polyvinyl pyrrolidone and ionic triiodide, designed for slow-release iodine, an active entity.7 Iodine causes the oxidation of biomolecules leading to disruption of microbial metabolic pathways and cell membranes integrity, which results in cell death.7 Structurally, chlorhexidine is made up of biguanide groups and 4-chlorophenyl rings, which are linked via a hexamethylene chain.8 Chlorhexidine digluconate is a stable salt, which has a high affinity for anionic elements, thus exerting microbial death by inhibiting glycosidic and proteolytic enzymes.8
For successful prevention and treatment of plaques, the quality of the mouth rinse or gargle is essential. Quality products are effective and pathogen-free.9,10 On the contrary, substandard products are associated with economic losses, especially for patients. Other detrimental effects include product recalls, treatment failure, and loss of confidence in the product and health care systems.11 Adherence to current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) guidelines and labeling requirements as prescribed by the relevant regulatory bodies assures the quality of the products. In Kenya, oral hygiene products, namely mouthwashes, are regulated by the Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS).12 The quality specifications are prescribed in the standard KS ISO 160408:2015. The regulation of health products in Kenya is vested on the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB).13 Therefore, manufacturers of oral care products must comply with regulations from either of the two regulatory authorities that may be considered easy to meet at a minimal cost.
Information on the quality of antiplaque products in the Kenyan market is unavailable. To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first report on the quality of antiplaque products in Kenya.
A total of 15 brands (34 samples) of povidone-iodine mouth rinses/gargles were collected from retail pharmacies within Nairobi County, Kenya. A total of 15 samples of nine chlorhexidine mouth rinses/gargle brands were similarly collected. Samples were coded and stored under ambient conditions until analysis.
To ensure conformity to labelling standards as per cGMP, KEBS, and PPB guidelines, the samples were checked for batch/lot numbers, storage conditions, manufacturing and expiry dates, manufacturer’s addresses, precautions on use, and the KEBS standardization marks (S-mark).
The following reagents were used: Analytical grade sodium thiosulfate and potassium bromate (Sigma-Aldrich; Steinheim, Germany), glacial acetic acid (VWR international SAS; Fontenay sous Bois, France), chlorhexidine gluconate (96.7% w/w; the National Quality Control Laboratory (NQCL); Nairobi, Kenya), hydrochloric acid and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) grade methanol (Loba Chemie Pvt. Ltd; Mumbai, India), and potassium iodide and analytical grade sodium octane sulfonate (Oxford Lab Chem, Thane, India). A Thermo scientific distillation system (Smart2Pure 3UV/UF, Niederelbert, Sweden) was used to prepare distilled water.
An automated titrator (TitroLine® 6000) (VWR International LLC, Radnor, Pennsylvania, USA) fitted with a VGA TFT display and a one-liter titrant reservoir with a 20 ml burette was used to titrate povidone-iodine samples. The reservoir was charged with a freshly prepared standard titrant for titrations while the titrant was placed in a beaker under magnetic stirring.
An Agilent 1260 Infinity liquid chromatography system (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, California, USA) fitted with a diode array detector and an oven for column thermostation was used to analyze chlorhexidine. A LiChrospher® 100 RP-18 end-capped column (Santa Clara, California, USA) maintained at 30 °C was used to perform the chromatographic separation. A mobile phase flow rate of 1.5 mL/min was set and the eluents were monitored at 254 nm.
The mobile phase for the assay of chlorhexidine was prepared by dissolving two grams of sodium octane sulfonate in 120 mL glacial acetic acid + 270 mL purified water + 730 mL methanol in a two-liter beaker. The solution was filtered using a mobile phase filtration unit and degassed by ultrasonication for 20 min before use.14
Sample preparation
A five mL chlorhexidine product equivalent to 10 mg chlorhexidine gluconate was transferred into a 100 mL volumetric flask. The mobile phase was used to make a solution, which was made up to the mark and filtered through a 0.45 μm PTFE nylon filter before sonication for 20 min.14
Chlorhexidine reference solution
Chlorhexidine gluconate (20 mg) chemical reference standard was transferred to a 25 mL volumetric flask, dissolved in the mobile phase, and made up to the mark. A total of 10 mL of this solution was pipetted into another volumetric flask (100 mL) and made up to the mark with mobile phase to make a 0.08 mg/mL final concentration.14
Standardization of 0.1 M NaS2O3
The titrant, 0.1M NaS2O3, was standardized according to British Pharmacopoeia (BP)15 specifications. For this purpose, 20 mL potassium bromate () was mixed with 40 mL distilled water, 10 mL potassium iodide (16.6% w/v), 5 mL HCl (7 M) prior to titration with 0.1 M NaS2O3 to a potentiometric endpoint. The correction factor for titrant was thus calculated and applied in subsequent determinations.15
Assay of samples
An aliquot of the povidone-iodine sample (100 mL) was pipetted into a 250 mL beaker. A mixture of 40 mL distilled water + 10 mL 0.1M HCl was added and the solution was titrated with 0.1M NaS2O3 using a TitroLine® 6000 automatic titrator to a potentiometric endpoint.15
The data obtained were analyzed using Microsoft Excel (version 2019) (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137). For HPLC experiments, the chlorhexidine content of samples was computed using peak areas of sample and reference solutions. In titrimetry, the NaS2O3 titers obtained were corrected with the factor and used to derive the povidone-iodine content of samples. Triplicate determinations were performed for all samples, and the coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated as a measure of precision.
The results obtained for the labeling requirements are presented in Table 1 while the assay results are summarized in Table 2.16,17 Labeling of the samples was qualitatively evaluated for the presence of labeling parameters that impact product identification and proper use. Missing information was common among the batches of the concerned product.
All the samples in the present study had manufacturing and expiry dates, batch numbers, brand names and the assay indicated on the labels. Additionally, all the samples were accompanied by patient information leaflets (package inserts). However, about 20% of the brands of povidone-iodine and 44% chlorhexidine products (Table 1) did not have their storage conditions indicated on their label. Only one povidone-iodine brand (PI-13) lacked the indication of the product on the label, while three brands (PI-01, PI-02, and PI-14) lacked the details of the manufacturers’ address. Moreover, KEBS S-marks were absent in all povidone-iodine products and 77% of chlorhexidine-based products.
The assay results of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine samples are shown in Table 2. The assay results for povidone-iodine products revealed that 52.9% of samples representing six brands failed to comply with assay specifications within a 24-84% label claim range. Due to low idodine content, these non-compliant samples may not be as effective as gargles and mouth rinses.
Products with iodine content above the pharmacopoeia limit as in the case of PI-13, may occasionally lead to side effects such as primary irritant dermatitis and allergic dermatitis.18 In addition, iodine absorption via the oral transmucosal route may interfere with serum thyroid-stimulating hormone levels and, in turn affect thyroid gland function. For chlorhexidine-based products, four samples (33.3%) failed to comply with the assay specifications (Table 2). These samples had chlorhexidine assay values below the lower pharmacopeial limit, which may compromise their antimicrobial efficacy.
Guidelines set by the Pharmacy and Poisons in Kenya and cGMP requirements dictate that pharmaceutical products should be clearly labeled with the product’s brand name, the name and address of the manufacturer, and the quantity/percentage of the API. Other details required include the directions of use, the storage conditions, batch number, indication and any relevant cautions.13 For local distribution, products manufactured in Kenya should have label information in English or Kiswahili. By contrast, the label is written in the original language for imports, and a complete translation should be provided.13
In the present study, all the samples had manufacturing, expiry dates, batch numbers, brand names, and the assay indicated on the labels. Additionally, all the samples were accompanied by patient information leaflets (package inserts). However, about 20% of the brands of povidone-iodine and 44% chlorhexidine products (Table 1) did not have their storage conditions indicated on their label. Only one povidone-iodine brand (PI-13) lacked the indication of the product on the label. Three brands (PI-01, PI-02, and PI-14) lacked details on the address of the respective manufacturers. The KEBS S-mark was absent in both povidone-iodine (100%) and chlorhexidine-based products (77%). According to a study conducted by Nyamweya and Abuga in Nairobi county to check for the compliance of hand sanitizers to packaging, labeling, and regulatory standards, products lacking the KEBS S-mark were regarded as either counterfeit or substandard.19
The strength of povidone-iodine is dependent on the concentration of unbound iodine in the complex.20,21 The assay results for povidone-iodine products revealed that 52.9% of samples representing six brands failed to comply with assay specifications within the 24-84% label claim range. Due to low iodine content, these non-compliant samples may be ineffective as gargles and mouth rinses. The findings from this study corroborate those reported for Tucuman, Argentina22 whereby 50% of the collected samples complied with specifications.22 However, a similar study in Iraq reported that many of the samples of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine mouthwashes/gargles did not comply with assay specifications.23
Products with an iodine content above the pharmacopoeia limit, e.g., PI-13, may lead to allergic or primary irritant dermatitis.18 In addition, iodine absorption via the oral transmucosal route may interfere with serum thyroid-stimulating hormone levels and, in turn, affect thyroid gland function. In the case of chlorhexidine-based products, four samples (33.3%) failed to comply with the assay specifications. These samples had chlorhexidine assay values below the lower pharmacopeial limit compromising their antimicrobial efficacy.
This study evaluated the quality of chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine-based mouth gargle/rinse products for the BP (2017) assay specifications and regulatory requirements for labelling in Nairobi County. From the non-compliance rates recorded, a wide range of problems of the antiseptics is anticipated. Poor-quality products undermine their application in controlling the spread of infections for households and healthcare systems. Similarly, poor-quality products may lead to a wastage of the consumers’ financial resources, and also cause a lack of trust in the regulatory authorities. Regulatory agencies, such as the PPB and the Kenya Bureau of Standards, should institute the requisite regulations to rid the market of sub-standard and falsified products to protect the unsuspecting public. Regulatory stringency is critical at all levels of the product life cycle from the manufacture, registration, distribution, and use. For this purpose, the regulators and manufacturers are responsible for ensuring adherence to cGMP, quality, safety, and efficacy of medicinal products. Continuous post-market surveillance could be instrumental in ensuring products in circulation are quality assured, hence conferring users’ confidence. Further investigations are needed to determine the quality of chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine-based oral products in other parts of Kenya.
Figshare: Raw data for Povidone Iodine Assay. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.18482669.17
Figshare: Raw data for the Chlorhexidine Assay. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.18484184.16
Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).
The authors acknowledge the technical expertise and assistance of Mr. H. Mugo, Ms. J. Mbula, and Mr. O. King’ondu of the Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry at the University of Nairobi. The authors also wish to thank the Centre for Traditional Medicine and Drug Research (CTMDR), and Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), for access to their analytical facilities. Dr. L. Keter and Ms. L. Koech are thanked for their technical assistance.
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?
Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?
No
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?
I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?
Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
Yes
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Pharmaceutical policies
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | |
---|---|
1 | |
Version 1 21 Mar 22 |
read |
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (0)