Suppr超能文献

诊室用牙漂白联合和不联合超声激活的疗效:一项随机、分口、双盲临床试验。

The effectiveness of in-office dental bleaching with and without sonic activation: A randomized, split-mouth, double-blind clinical trial.

机构信息

School of Dentistry, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus, AM, Brazil.

School of Dentistry, Paulo Picanço School of Dentistry, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil.

出版信息

J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022 Mar;34(2):360-368. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12863. Epub 2021 Dec 31.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study was aimed at comparing the bleaching efficacy and bleaching sensitivity (BS) of two higher-concentration in-office bleaching gels (37% carbamide peroxide [CP] and 38% hydrogen peroxide [HP]) applied under two conditions: alone or in association with sonic activation.

METHODS

Fifty-six volunteers were randomly assigned in the split-mouth design into the following groups: CP, CP with sonic activation (CPS), HP, and HP with sonic activation (HPS). Two in-office bleaching sessions were performed. Color was evaluated using Vita Classical, Vita Bleachedguide, and digital spectrophotometer at baseline and at 30 days post-bleaching. Absolute risk and intensity of BS were recorded using two pain scales. All data were evaluated statistically (color changes [t test], BS [Chi-square and McNemar test], and BS intensity [VAS; t test; NRS; Wilcoxon; α = 0.05]).

RESULTS

Significant and higher whitening was observed for HP when compared with CP (p < 0.04). However, higher BS intensity was observed in the former (p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed in whitening effect or BS when the HP or CP bleaching gels were agitated (sonic application) compared with when they were not (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The 37% CP gel demonstrated lower bleaching efficacy and lower BS compared with the 38% HP bleaching gel. The whitening effect was not influenced by the use of sonic activation.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The use of 37% CP gel did not achieve the same whitening effect when compared to 38% HP gel used for in-office bleaching. The use of sonic activation offers no benefit for in-office bleaching.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较两种高浓度的诊室用漂白凝胶(37%过氧化脲[CP]和 38%过氧化氢[HP])在两种条件下的漂白效果和漂白敏感性(BS):单独使用或联合声激活使用。

方法

56 名志愿者采用分口设计随机分为以下组:CP 组、CP 联合声激活(CPS)组、HP 组和 HP 联合声激活(HPS)组。进行了两次诊室漂白。在基线和漂白后 30 天,使用 Vita Classical、Vita Bleachedguide 和数字分光光度计评估颜色。使用两个疼痛量表记录绝对 BS 风险和强度。使用 t 检验、卡方和 McNemar 检验、VAS、NRS 和 Wilcoxon 检验统计评估所有数据(颜色变化[检验]、BS[检验和 McNemar 检验]和 BS 强度[VAS;t 检验;NRS;Wilcoxon;α=0.05])。

结果

与 CP 相比,HP 观察到更显著和更高的增白效果(p<0.04)。然而,前者观察到更高的 BS 强度(p<0.001)。与不搅拌(声激活)相比,当 HP 或 CP 漂白凝胶搅拌(声应用)时,漂白效果或 BS 没有显著差异(p>0.05)。

结论

与 38% HP 漂白凝胶相比,37% CP 凝胶显示出较低的漂白效果和较低的 BS。声激活的使用并未影响增白效果。

临床意义

与 38% HP 凝胶用于诊室漂白相比,使用 37% CP 凝胶并未达到相同的美白效果。声激活的使用对诊室漂白没有益处。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验