Effect of the type of application tip for 35% hydrogen peroxide on bleaching efficacy and tooth sensitivity: A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the bleaching efficacy (BE) and tooth sensitivity (TS) of in-office bleaching using different application tips. METHODS: Forty-eight participants were selected (split-mouth), one to receive bleaching with an attached brush tip and one with a conventional tip. The procedure was performed with Whiteness Automixx Plus 35%. The BE was evaluated at the beginning, weekly, one and 12 months post-bleaching with a Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer (ΔE*ab, ΔE00, and WID) and with Vita classical A1-D4 and Vita Bleachedguide shade guides units (ΔSGU). Absolute risk and intensity of TS were recorded using the Visual Analogue Scale. The equivalence of BE was analyzed using the two one-sided t-tests for paired samples. The absolute risk of TS was evaluated using the McNemar test, and the TS intensity was measured with the paired t test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The equivalence of BE was observed for both groups in all color evaluations (p > 0.05). A lower absolute risk and intensity of TS were observed for the attached brush tip when compared with the conventional tip (p < 0.003 and p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Using an attached brush tip showed the same BE as a conventional tip. However, for the attached brush tip, there was a reduction in TS. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The applicator-attached brush tip is recommended for in-office dental bleaching, because of the possible reduction in risk and intensity of TS.

Does simultaneous versus individual-arch at-home dental bleaching regimen influence patient satisfaction? A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Our randomized, parallel and single-blinded clinical trial evaluated patient level of discomfort during at-home bleaching testing the equivalence between two different protocols for the use of bleaching trays (simultaneous vs. single arch), as well as tooth sensitivity (TS), gingival irritation, (GI) and bleaching efficacy (BE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We randomized 100 patients into: simultaneous (n = 50) and single arch (n = 50). At-home bleaching was performed with 10% hydrogen peroxide (HP) for 2 weeks for simultaneous group and 4 weeks for single arch group. We assessed patient level of discomfort using 9-item questionnaire. The TS and GI, as well as BE using spectrophotometer and color guide were assessed using the visual analog scale (0-10). Data from level of discomfort and BE were evaluated by Student's t test. The TS and GI were compared using the relative risk and confidence interval (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Only tray adaptation showed a significant effect after the second week (p < 0.002). There was equivalence between groups for level of discomfort (p < 0.01). We found no significant intergroup differences for the risk of TS or GI, nor for intensity. We observed no significant differences between them regarding bleaching efficacy (p > 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: A simultaneous-use protocol for customized at-home dental bleaching trays proved to be equivalent to using single arch for patient level of discomfort and bleaching efficacy, with no significant increase in adverse effects. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians may decide whether to use a simultaneous or single arch protocol for tray usage; however, bleaching was achieved more quickly when the trays were worn simultaneously.

Gingival irritation in patients submitted to at-home bleaching with different cutouts of the bleaching tray: a randomized, single-blind clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: This split-mouth randomized, single-blind clinical trial evaluated the gingival irritation (GI) of at-home bleaching with individual trays of different cutouts, as well as the tooth sensitivity (TS) and color change. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients were randomized as to which side would receive the type of bleaching tray cutout: scalloped (in the gingival margin) and nonscalloped (extended from the gingival margin). The at-home bleaching was performed for 30 min with 10% hydrogen peroxide (HP) for 2 weeks. The absolute risk and intensity of GI and TS were assessed with a visual analog scale. Color change was assessed using a digital spectrophotometer and a color guide (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The proportion of patients who experienced GI was 57.5% (odds ratio 95% CI = 1.1 [0.7 to 1.8]), with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.66). The proportion of patients who experienced TS was 64.1% (odds ratio 95% CI = 1.0 [0.6 to 1.6]), with no significant difference between groups (p = 1.0). There is equivalence of scalloped and noscalloped groups for GI intensity (p < 0.01). Significant whitening was detected for both groups. Although some differences were observed between groups (CIELab and CIEDE00; p < 0.02), these were below of the considered clinically noticeable. CONCLUSIONS: The different cutouts of trays proved to be equivalent when regarding gengival irritation and tooth sensitivity when 10% HP for at-home bleaching was used. Significant color change was observed in both groups. However, significant differences detected between groups are not considered clinically noticeable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (RBR-2s34685). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Scalloped or not, the individual trays for at-home bleaching could be considered a clinician's decision.