Clinical Trial Assessing Light Enhancement of In-office Tooth Whitening

ABSTRACT Objective: Evaluate a light‐enhanced in‐office tooth whitening system in order to assess tooth color and safety. Methods: Thirty‐three adults were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups. Professional treatment involved application of a 25% H2O2 gel (Discus Dental ZOOM!) with l...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry 2009-10, Vol.21 (5), p.336-347
Hauptverfasser:	KUGEL, GERARD, FERREIRA, SUSANA, SHARMA, SHRADHA, BARKER, MATTHEW L., GERLACH, ROBERT W.
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Adult Colorimetry Dentin Sensitivity - etiology Dentistry Female Gels Gingival Diseases - etiology Humans Hydrogen Peroxide - administration & dosage Light Male Middle Aged Oxides - administration & dosage Recurrence Reproducibility of Results Safety Single-Blind Method Tooth Bleaching - adverse effects Tooth Bleaching - methods Toothache - etiology Young Adult
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

container_end_page	347
container_issue	5
container_start_page	336
container_title	Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry
container_volume	21
creator	KUGEL, GERARD FERREIRA, SUSANA SHARMA, SHRADHA BARKER, MATTHEW L. GERLACH, ROBERT W.
description	ABSTRACT Objective: Evaluate a light‐enhanced in‐office tooth whitening system in order to assess tooth color and safety. Methods: Thirty‐three adults were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups. Professional treatment involved application of a 25% H2O2 gel (Discus Dental ZOOM!) with light enhancement, H2O2 gel alone, or the light alone with no peroxide. The 12 anterior teeth were treated three times for 20 minutes each. Efficacy was measured objectively as Lab* color change using digital images, tooth shade was measured, and safety was evaluated immediately after treatment and at posttreatment days 7 and 30. Results: After adjusting for baseline and age, immediate (end‐of‐treatment) means (SE) for Δb* (yellowness) were –3.1 (0.25) for the gel + light, –2.0 (0.25) for the gel‐only group, and –2.4 (0.25) for the light‐only group. Significant (p
doi_str_mv	10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00287.x
format	Article
fullrecord	<record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_734070050</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>734070050</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4337-6dcb1edf134783a22d84a2053778242b878876ff67a491f92ad9b0c6f764f7973</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE9r2zAYh8XoWNNsX2H4tJ7svfpjv_Jhh5KmWUZIYWR09CIUW2qUOnZqOTT59pWX0N5GdZAEen6vfjyERBQSGtb3dUIRZCyZgIQB5AkAk5jsP5DB68NZuIs8iwVN03Ny4f0agKaY4ydyTnPMMw58QCajytWu0FW0aF3Yr7w33rv6IZq5h1UXjeuVrguzMXUXNTaa1nFjrStMtGiabhXdrVxn6oB_Jh-trrz5cjqH5M_NeDH6Gc9uJ9PR1SwuBOcYZ2WxpKa0lAuUXDNWSqEZpBwxdGZLiVJiZm2GWuTU5kyX-RKKzGImbOjOh-TyOHfbNk874zu1cb4wVaVr0-y8Qi4AAVII5Lf_kozS4IynAZRHsGgb71tj1bZ1G90eFAXV61Zr1VtVvVXV61b_dKt9iH49_bFbbkz5Fjz5DcCPI_DsKnN492D1a_z7um83JPEx73xn9q953T6qDDmm6m4-Uek94l86v1eCvwAesZtN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>21128735</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical Trial Assessing Light Enhancement of In-office Tooth Whitening</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>KUGEL, GERARD ; FERREIRA, SUSANA ; SHARMA, SHRADHA ; BARKER, MATTHEW L. ; GERLACH, ROBERT W.</creator><creatorcontrib>KUGEL, GERARD ; FERREIRA, SUSANA ; SHARMA, SHRADHA ; BARKER, MATTHEW L. ; GERLACH, ROBERT W.</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT Objective: Evaluate a light‐enhanced in‐office tooth whitening system in order to assess tooth color and safety. Methods: Thirty‐three adults were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups. Professional treatment involved application of a 25% H2O2 gel (Discus Dental ZOOM!) with light enhancement, H2O2 gel alone, or the light alone with no peroxide. The 12 anterior teeth were treated three times for 20 minutes each. Efficacy was measured objectively as Lab* color change using digital images, tooth shade was measured, and safety was evaluated immediately after treatment and at posttreatment days 7 and 30. Results: After adjusting for baseline and age, immediate (end‐of‐treatment) means (SE) for Δb* (yellowness) were –3.1 (0.25) for the gel + light, –2.0 (0.25) for the gel‐only group, and –2.4 (0.25) for the light‐only group. Significant (p < 0.05) color rebound was evident at posttreatment day 7. By day 30, adjusted means (SE)for Δb* were –1.7 (0.20) for the gel + light group, –1.1 (0.20) for the gel‐only group, and –0.5 (0.20) for the light‐only group. Both peroxide groups differed significantly (p < 0.05) from light alone on Δb* and ΔL. In the gel + light group, 91% of subjects experienced tooth sensitivity, the majority of which was moderate or severe. Adverse events were low in the light‐only group. Conclusion: Use of light enhancement for in‐office whitening leads to immediate color change, after which there was significant color and shade rebound within 7 days as well as moderate‐to‐severe tooth sensitivity during and after treatment. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Increased tooth sensitivity during treatment and appreciable short‐term color rebound after treatment may impact the utility of in‐office tooth whitening with peroxide and light as a stand‐alone esthetic procedure.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1496-4155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1708-8240</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00287.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19796303</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Colorimetry ; Dentin Sensitivity - etiology ; Dentistry ; Female ; Gels ; Gingival Diseases - etiology ; Humans ; Hydrogen Peroxide - administration & dosage ; Light ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Oxides - administration & dosage ; Recurrence ; Reproducibility of Results ; Safety ; Single-Blind Method ; Tooth Bleaching - adverse effects ; Tooth Bleaching - methods ; Toothache - etiology ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry, 2009-10, Vol.21 (5), p.336-347</ispartof><rights>2009, COPYRIGHT THE AUTHORS. JOURNAL COMPILATION © 2009, WILEY PERIODICALS, INC.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4337-6dcb1edf134783a22d84a2053778242b878876ff67a491f92ad9b0c6f764f7973</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4337-6dcb1edf134783a22d84a2053778242b878876ff67a491f92ad9b0c6f764f7973</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1708-8240.2009.00287.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1708-8240.2009.00287.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19796303$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>KUGEL, GERARD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FERREIRA, SUSANA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHARMA, SHRADHA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BARKER, MATTHEW L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GERLACH, ROBERT W.</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical Trial Assessing Light Enhancement of In-office Tooth Whitening</title><title>Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry</title><addtitle>J Esthet Restor Dent</addtitle><description>ABSTRACT Objective: Evaluate a light‐enhanced in‐office tooth whitening system in order to assess tooth color and safety. Methods: Thirty‐three adults were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups. Professional treatment involved application of a 25% H2O2 gel (Discus Dental ZOOM!) with light enhancement, H2O2 gel alone, or the light alone with no peroxide. The 12 anterior teeth were treated three times for 20 minutes each. Efficacy was measured objectively as Lab color change using digital images, tooth shade was measured, and safety was evaluated immediately after treatment and at posttreatment days 7 and 30. Results: After adjusting for baseline and age, immediate (end‐of‐treatment) means (SE) for Δb* (yellowness) were –3.1 (0.25) for the gel + light, –2.0 (0.25) for the gel‐only group, and –2.4 (0.25) for the light‐only group. Significant (p < 0.05) color rebound was evident at posttreatment day 7. By day 30, adjusted means (SE)for Δb* were –1.7 (0.20) for the gel + light group, –1.1 (0.20) for the gel‐only group, and –0.5 (0.20) for the light‐only group. Both peroxide groups differed significantly (p < 0.05) from light alone on Δb* and ΔL. In the gel + light group, 91% of subjects experienced tooth sensitivity, the majority of which was moderate or severe. Adverse events were low in the light‐only group. Conclusion: Use of light enhancement for in‐office whitening leads to immediate color change, after which there was significant color and shade rebound within 7 days as well as moderate‐to‐severe tooth sensitivity during and after treatment. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Increased tooth sensitivity during treatment and appreciable short‐term color rebound after treatment may impact the utility of in‐office tooth whitening with peroxide and light as a stand‐alone esthetic procedure.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Colorimetry</subject><subject>Dentin Sensitivity - etiology</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gels</subject><subject>Gingival Diseases - etiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hydrogen Peroxide - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Light</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Oxides - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Safety</subject><subject>Single-Blind Method</subject><subject>Tooth Bleaching - adverse effects</subject><subject>Tooth Bleaching - methods</subject><subject>Toothache - etiology</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1496-4155</issn><issn>1708-8240</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE9r2zAYh8XoWNNsX2H4tJ7svfpjv_Jhh5KmWUZIYWR09CIUW2qUOnZqOTT59pWX0N5GdZAEen6vfjyERBQSGtb3dUIRZCyZgIQB5AkAk5jsP5DB68NZuIs8iwVN03Ny4f0agKaY4ydyTnPMMw58QCajytWu0FW0aF3Yr7w33rv6IZq5h1UXjeuVrguzMXUXNTaa1nFjrStMtGiabhXdrVxn6oB_Jh-trrz5cjqH5M_NeDH6Gc9uJ9PR1SwuBOcYZ2WxpKa0lAuUXDNWSqEZpBwxdGZLiVJiZm2GWuTU5kyX-RKKzGImbOjOh-TyOHfbNk874zu1cb4wVaVr0-y8Qi4AAVII5Lf_kozS4IynAZRHsGgb71tj1bZ1G90eFAXV61Zr1VtVvVXV61b_dKt9iH49_bFbbkz5Fjz5DcCPI_DsKnN492D1a_z7um83JPEx73xn9q953T6qDDmm6m4-Uek94l86v1eCvwAesZtN</recordid><startdate>200910</startdate><enddate>200910</enddate><creator>KUGEL, GERARD</creator><creator>FERREIRA, SUSANA</creator><creator>SHARMA, SHRADHA</creator><creator>BARKER, MATTHEW L.</creator><creator>GERLACH, ROBERT W.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200910</creationdate><title>Clinical Trial Assessing Light Enhancement of In-office Tooth Whitening</title><author>KUGEL, GERARD ; FERREIRA, SUSANA ; SHARMA, SHRADHA ; BARKER, MATTHEW L. ; GERLACH, ROBERT W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4337-6dcb1edf134783a22d84a2053778242b878876ff67a491f92ad9b0c6f764f7973</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Colorimetry</topic><topic>Dentin Sensitivity - etiology</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gels</topic><topic>Gingival Diseases - etiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hydrogen Peroxide - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Light</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Oxides - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Safety</topic><topic>Single-Blind Method</topic><topic>Tooth Bleaching - adverse effects</topic><topic>Tooth Bleaching - methods</topic><topic>Toothache - etiology</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>KUGEL, GERARD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FERREIRA, SUSANA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHARMA, SHRADHA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BARKER, MATTHEW L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GERLACH, ROBERT W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>KUGEL, GERARD</au><au>FERREIRA, SUSANA</au><au>SHARMA, SHRADHA</au><au>BARKER, MATTHEW L.</au><au>GERLACH, ROBERT W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical Trial Assessing Light Enhancement of In-office Tooth Whitening</atitle><jtitle>Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry</jtitle><addtitle>J Esthet Restor Dent</addtitle><date>2009-10</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>336</spage><epage>347</epage><pages>336-347</pages><issn>1496-4155</issn><eissn>1708-8240</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT Objective: Evaluate a light‐enhanced in‐office tooth whitening system in order to assess tooth color and safety. Methods: Thirty‐three adults were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups. Professional treatment involved application of a 25% H2O2 gel (Discus Dental ZOOM!) with light enhancement, H2O2 gel alone, or the light alone with no peroxide. The 12 anterior teeth were treated three times for 20 minutes each. Efficacy was measured objectively as Lab color change using digital images, tooth shade was measured, and safety was evaluated immediately after treatment and at posttreatment days 7 and 30. Results: After adjusting for baseline and age, immediate (end‐of‐treatment) means (SE) for Δb* (yellowness) were –3.1 (0.25) for the gel + light, –2.0 (0.25) for the gel‐only group, and –2.4 (0.25) for the light‐only group. Significant (p < 0.05) color rebound was evident at posttreatment day 7. By day 30, adjusted means (SE)for Δb* were –1.7 (0.20) for the gel + light group, –1.1 (0.20) for the gel‐only group, and –0.5 (0.20) for the light‐only group. Both peroxide groups differed significantly (p < 0.05) from light alone on Δb* and ΔL*. In the gel + light group, 91% of subjects experienced tooth sensitivity, the majority of which was moderate or severe. Adverse events were low in the light‐only group. Conclusion: Use of light enhancement for in‐office whitening leads to immediate color change, after which there was significant color and shade rebound within 7 days as well as moderate‐to‐severe tooth sensitivity during and after treatment. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Increased tooth sensitivity during treatment and appreciable short‐term color rebound after treatment may impact the utility of in‐office tooth whitening with peroxide and light as a stand‐alone esthetic procedure.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Inc</pub><pmid>19796303</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00287.x</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext	fulltext
identifier	ISSN: 1496-4155
ispartof	Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry, 2009-10, Vol.21 (5), p.336-347
issn	1496-4155 1708-8240
language	eng
recordid	cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_734070050
source	MEDLINE; Wiley Journals
subjects	Adult Colorimetry Dentin Sensitivity - etiology Dentistry Female Gels Gingival Diseases - etiology Humans Hydrogen Peroxide - administration & dosage Light Male Middle Aged Oxides - administration & dosage Recurrence Reproducibility of Results Safety Single-Blind Method Tooth Bleaching - adverse effects Tooth Bleaching - methods Toothache - etiology Young Adult
title	Clinical Trial Assessing Light Enhancement of In-office Tooth Whitening
url	https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T07%3A48%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20Trial%20Assessing%20Light%20Enhancement%20of%20In-office%20Tooth%20Whitening&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20esthetic%20and%20restorative%20dentistry&rft.au=KUGEL,%20GERARD&rft.date=2009-10&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=336&rft.epage=347&rft.pages=336-347&rft.issn=1496-4155&rft.eissn=1708-8240&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00287.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E734070050%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=21128735&rft_id=info:pmid/19796303&rfr_iscdi=true