Cronin Matthew J, Charles Christine A, Zhao Qian, Dembling Wayne Z
New Institutional Service Co., Inc, Northfield, New Jersey, USA.
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2005 Feb;26(2):140, 142, 144-8.
Tooth whitening is one of the most widely accepted esthetic procedures in dentistry. Various treatment options include in-office and prescribed at-home bleaching procedures, over-the-counter bleaching kits, and whitening dentifrices. This study evaluated and compared a 6% hydrogen peroxide tooth bleaching gel delivered on polyethylene film (HP) with an 18% carbamide peroxide brush-applied liquid gel (CP). A total of 59 subjects completed this 2-week, examiner blind, randomized, parallel group study. Both treatments were applied twice daily for 2 weeks according to the manufacturer's instructions. Evaluations for oral safety and Vita tooth shade were conducted by a dental examiner at baseline and 2 weeks after product use. In addition, the ShadeVision System was used to determine changes in Vita shade and Lab* values. Based on both the examiner and ShadeVision System assessments, both treatments significantly improved tooth shade. Improvements in Vita tooth shade based on the adjusted mean for HP were 2.64 (P < 0.001) and 2.33 (P < 0.001) for the examiner and ShadeVision System assessments, respectively, compared with improvements of 1.04 (P = .004) and 0.42 (P = 0.029) for CP users, respectively. The difference between treatments was found to be significant for both the examiner (P = .005) and ShadeVision (P = .001) assessments. Findings from the Lab* data derived from the ShadeVision System were in agreement with Vita assessments, with significant differences for changes in L*, a*, and b* in favor of HP users (P = .001). In this study, the ShadeVision method of color analysis was relatively easy to use and demonstrated significant differences between 2 OTC whitening products using both Vitapan and Lab* means of assessment.
牙齿美白是牙科领域中最广泛接受的美容程序之一。各种治疗选择包括诊所内治疗和处方家用漂白程序、非处方漂白套装以及美白牙膏。本研究评估并比较了一种涂覆在聚乙烯薄膜上的6%过氧化氢牙齿漂白凝胶（HP）和一种18%过氧化脲刷涂液体凝胶（CP）。共有59名受试者完成了这项为期2周、检查者盲法、随机、平行组研究。两种治疗均按照制造商的说明每天应用两次，持续2周。由牙科检查者在基线和产品使用2周后进行口腔安全性和Vita牙齿色度评估。此外，使用ShadeVision系统来确定Vita色度和Lab值的变化。基于检查者和ShadeVision系统的评估，两种治疗均显著改善了牙齿色度。根据HP调整后的平均值，检查者评估中Vita牙齿色度的改善为2.64（P < 0.001），ShadeVision系统评估中为2.33（P < 0.001），而CP使用者的改善分别为1.04（P = 0.004）和0.42（P = 0.029）。发现两种治疗在检查者评估（P = 0.005）和ShadeVision评估（P = 0.001）中差异均显著。从ShadeVision系统得出的Lab数据结果与Vita评估一致，L*、a和b的变化存在显著差异，有利于HP使用者（P = 0.001）。在本研究中，ShadeVision颜色分析方法相对易于使用，并且在使用Vitapan和Lab*评估方法时，证明了两种非处方美白产品之间存在显著差异。
