Inter-mouthwash analysis between independent groups: test group A 
PLAQUE, PLAQUE
Table 
DenTiUS Deep Plaque clinical indices were obtained in test groups A and B in phase 1 (after using the cymenol and placebo mouthwashes, respectively) and phase 2 (after using the cymenol mouthwash in both groups)Total plaque: visible plaque + non-visible plaqueSD, standard deviation*Due to the non-normal distribution of some of the contrasted variables, the Mann-Whitney U test was applied to compare the two groupsIn phase 1 on day 0 (after professional dental cleaning), the percentages of the visible plaque areas were similar between the groups (5.57 ± 3.57% vs. 5.68 ± 3.53%, p = 0.906).On day 4 of the same phase, the percentage of the visible plaque area was significantly lower in the cymenol subjects than in the placebo subjects, both in absolute (35.31 ± 14.93% vs. 46.57 ± 18.92%, p = 0.023) and relative (29.80 ± 13.97% vs. 40.53 ± 18.48%, p = 0.024) terms. The subjects who used the cymenol mouthwashes also had a lower total plaque area value (57.49 ± 13.26% vs. 62.75 ± 16.85% in the placebo subjects, p = 0.225), although these results did not achieve statistical significance. During the first four days of the experiment, the visible plaque area growth rate was significantly lower in the cymenol participants than in those in the placebo participants, both in absolute (0.36 ± 0.15% vs. 0.49 ± 0.20%, p = 0.016) and relative (0.31 ± 0.14% vs. 0.43 ± 0.19%, p = 0.017) terms. Concerning the placebo, these results mean that the cymenol mouthwash reduced the growth rate of the visible plaque area in the first four days by 26% (absolute) to 28% (relative).Again, in phase 2 on day 8, the percentage of the visible plaque area was significantly lower in test group A than in test group B (absolute = 44.79 ± 15.77% vs. 65.12 ± 16.37%, p < 0.001; relative = 39.27 ± 14.33% vs. 59.24 ± 16.90%, p < 0.001), as was the percentage of the total plaque area (65.17 ± 9.73% vs. 74.52 ± 13.55%, p = 0.007). Despite both groups using the cymenol mouthwash in the last four days of the trial, the visible plaque area growth rate was significantly lower in the cymenol volunteers than those given the placebo (absolute = 0.23 ± 0.08 vs. 0.34 ± 0.08, p < 0.001; relative = 0.20 ± 0.07 vs. 0.31 ± 0.08, p < 0.001); this was also the case for the total plaque area growth rate (0.34 ± 0.05 vs. 0.39 ± 0.07, p = 0.005). However, given the growth that occurred with the placebo mouthwash on day 4, the results above imply that the use of the cymenol mouthwash in the last four days of the trial reduced the growth rate of both the visible plaque area (absolute and relative) in these four days by 53% (test group A) and 29% (test group B), and the total plaque area by 48% (test group A) and 41% (test group B).