Comparison of effectiveness and sensitivity using two in-office bleaching protocols for a 6% hydrogen peroxide gel in a randomized clinical trial
Artículo
![Thumbnail](/themes/Mirage2/images/cubierta.jpg)
Open/ Download
Publication date
2017Metadata
Show full item record
Cómo citar
Vildósola Grez, Patricio
Cómo citar
Comparison of effectiveness and sensitivity using two in-office bleaching protocols for a 6% hydrogen peroxide gel in a randomized clinical trial
Author
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this blinded and randomized clinical trial was to compare two
application protocols (one 36-minute application vs three 12-minute applications). We then
assessed the effectiveness of the bleaching and any increase in sensitivity that was induced by
bleaching via a split-mouth design.
Methods and Materials: Thirty patients were
treated. One group had a half arch of teeth
treated with a traditional application protocol
(group A: 3 3 12 minutes for two sessions). The
other received an abbreviated protocol (group
B: 1 3 36 minutes over two sessions). Two
sessions were appointed with a two-day interval between them. The tooth color was registered at each session, as well as one week and
one month after completing the treatment via
a spectrophotometer. This measured L*, a*,
and b*. This was also evaluated subjectively
using the VITA classical A1-D4 guide and VITA
Bleachedguide 3D-MASTER. Tooth sensitivity
was registered according to the visual analogue scale (VAS) scale. Tooth color variation
and sensitivity were compared between
groups.
Results: Both treatments changed tooth color
vs baseline. The DE* = 5.71 6 2.62 in group A,
and DE* = 4.93 6 2.09 in group B one month
after completing the bleaching (p=0.20). No
statistical differences were seen via subjective
evaluations. There were no differences in
tooth sensitivity between the groups. The
absolute risk of sensitivity reported for both
groups was 6.25% (p=0.298). The intensity by
VAS was mild (p=1.00).
Conclusions: We used hydrogen peroxide (6%)
that was light activated with a hybrid LED/
laser and two different protocols (one 36-minute application vs three 12-minute applications each for two sessions). These approaches
were equally effective. There were no differences in absolute risk of sensitivity; both
groups reported mild sensitivity.
Indexation
Artículo de publicación SCOPUS
Identifier
URI: https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/159135
DOI: 10.2341/16-043-C
ISSN: 03617734
Quote Item
Operative Dentistry, Volumen 42, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 244-252.
Collections