These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect on enamel microhardness of two consumer-available bleaching solutions when compared with a dentist-prescribed, home-applied bleaching solution and a control.
    Author: Leonard RH, Teixeira EC, Garland GE, Ritter AV.
    Journal: J Esthet Restor Dent; 2005; 17(6):343-50; discussion 351. PubMed ID: 16417827.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: There exists limited data in the literature regarding the efficacy and safety of consumer-available, paint-on bleaching solutions. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of two consumer-available, paint-on bleaching products on enamel microhardness against a control and a dentist-prescribed, home-applied (DPHA) bleaching product. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty enamel slabs were obtained from extracted human teeth and randomly divided into four treatment groups: (1) control; (2) Opalescence (Ultradent Products, Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA); (3) Crest Night Effects (Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH, USA); and (4) Colgate Simply White Night (Colgate-Palmolive Co., Piscataway, NJ, USA). Opalescence is a carbamide peroxide DPHA product, whereas Crest Night Effects and Colgate Simply White Night are consumer-available products. The specimens in groups 2 to 4 underwent 2 weeks of treatment for 8 h/d. Specimens were maintained in artificial saliva at 37 degrees C between treatments. Subsequently, one-half of the specimens in groups 2 to 4 (n=10) underwent an additional seven treatments for 8 h/d, while the other half were stored in artificial saliva, receiving no further treatment. Microhardness was measured as Knoop hardness numbers (KHNs) at baseline and after 1, 7, 14, and 21 treatment days. The results were analyzed for statistical significance both intra- and intergroups using analysis of variance (p=.05). RESULTS: A statistically significant reduction in mean KHN was observed compared with baseline at 1, 7, 14, and 21 treatment days for group 4 and at 7 treatment days for group 3. When compared with the control or DPHA product, group 4 was the only treatment that resulted in significantly lower mean KHNs at 7, 14, and 21 treatment days. CONCLUSION: When evaluating enamel microhardness, consumer available, paint-on bleaching solutions may adversely affect enamel microhardness compared to a control and 10% carbamide peroxide DPHA bleaching solution. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: With numerous consumer-available bleaching products on the market, it is crucial to be judicious in their selection and use. The results of this in vitro study showed that the consumer-available, paint-on bleaching solutions adversely affected enamel microhardness at some time during the study. Consumers should be made aware of this effect on enamel.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]