de Assis Camila de Azevedo, Antoniazzi Raquel Pippi, Zanatta Fabrício Batistin, Rösing Cassiano Kuchenbecker
Graduate Program in Dentistry, Lutheran University of Brazil.
Braz Oral Res. 2006 Jul-Sep;20(3):252-6. doi: 10.1590/s1806-83242006000300013.
The aim of this double-blind, controlled, split-mouth designed clinical trial was to assess the effect of a single application of Gluma Desensitizer on alleviating dentin hypersensitivity. Twelve subjects entered the study and ten completed the protocol. Each subject had two teeth treated: one with Gluma Desensitizer according to the manufacturer's instructions and one with water. The assessment of pain was performed with the VAS (Visual Analogue Scale), after tactile (probe), thermal (cold blast of water) and thermal/evaporative (cold blast of air) stimuli at baseline, immediately after treatment, after 1 week and after 4 weeks. The mean VAS values for the test and control teeth were compared by the paired t test (alpha = 0.05). Repeated measurements ANOVA was used to compare the different experimental times. The results showed that for test teeth, at baseline, mean VAS values were 1.76 (+/- 2.82), 7.10 (+/- 2.10) and 4.75 (+/- 2.65), and, after 4 weeks, the mean values were 1.70 (+/- 2.31), 5.50 (+/- 3.30) and 4.61 (+/- 3.14), respectively for probe, water and air stimuli. For the control teeth, at baseline, the mean VAS values were 1.86 (+/- 2.92), 6.61 (+/- 2.31) and 4.08 (+/- 2.91) and, after 4 weeks, 2.66 (+/- 3.07), 6.32 (+/- 2.94) e 4.76 (+/- 3.26). There were no statistically significant differences between test and control teeth at any time. No intra-group differences were demonstrated either. It was concluded that Gluma Desensitizer had no effect on hypersensitive teeth from periodontally treated patients for a period up to 4 weeks.
这项双盲、对照、半口设计的临床试验旨在评估单次应用Gluma脱敏剂对减轻牙本质过敏的效果。12名受试者进入研究，10名完成了试验方案。每名受试者有两颗牙齿接受治疗：一颗按照制造商的说明用Gluma脱敏剂治疗，另一颗用水治疗。在基线、治疗后即刻、1周后和4周后，通过触觉（探针）、热（冷水喷射）和热/蒸发（冷空气喷射）刺激后，使用视觉模拟量表（VAS）进行疼痛评估。通过配对t检验（α = 0.05）比较试验组和对照组牙齿的平均VAS值。使用重复测量方差分析比较不同的实验时间。结果显示，对于试验组牙齿，在基线时，探针、水和空气刺激的平均VAS值分别为1.76（±2.82）、7.10（±2.10）和4.75（±2.65），4周后，平均值分别为1.70（±2.31）、5.50（±3.30）和4.61（±3.14）。对于对照组牙齿，在基线时，平均VAS值分别为1.86（±2.92）、6.61（±2.31）和4.08（±2.91），4周后，分别为2.66（±3.07）、6.32（±2.94）和4.76（±3.26）。在任何时间，试验组和对照组牙齿之间均无统计学显著差异。组内差异也未得到证实。得出的结论是，在长达4周的时间内，Gluma脱敏剂对牙周治疗患者的过敏牙齿没有效果。
