Taynara de Souza Carneiro, Michael Willian Favoreto, João Pedro Ferreira Rodrigues, Elisama Sutil, Gabrielle Gomes Centenaro, Isabela de Matos de Freitas, Alessandra Reis, Laura Ceballos García, Alessandro Dourado Loguercio
{"title":"In-office dental bleaching in adolescents using 6% hydrogen peroxide with and without gingival barrier: a randomized double-blind clinical trial.","authors":"Taynara de Souza Carneiro, Michael Willian Favoreto, João Pedro Ferreira Rodrigues, Elisama Sutil, Gabrielle Gomes Centenaro, Isabela de Matos de Freitas, Alessandra Reis, Laura Ceballos García, Alessandro Dourado Loguercio","doi":"10.1590/1678-7757-2023-0416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>At low concentrations used for in-office bleaching gels, such as 6% HP, gingival barrier continues to be performed. If we take into account that, in the at-home bleaching technique, no barrier is indicated, it seems that the use of a gingival barrier fails to make much sense when bleaching gel in low concentration is used for in-office bleaching.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This double-blind, split-mouth, randomized clinical trial evaluated the gingival irritation (GI) of in-office bleaching using 6% hydrogen peroxide (HP) with and without a gingival barrier in adolescents, as well as color change and the impact of oral condition on quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Overall, 60 participants were randomized into which side would or would not receive the gingival barrier. In-office bleaching was performed for 50 minutes with 6% HP in three sessions. The absolute risk and intensity of GI were assessed with a visual analogue scale. Color change was assessed using a digital spectrophotometer and color guides. The impact of oral condition on quality of life was assessed using the Brazilian version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (α=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proportion of patients who presented GI for the \"with barrier\" group was 31.6% and for the \"without barrier\" group, 30% (p=1.0). There is an equivalence for the evaluated groups regarding GI intensity (p<0.01). Color change was detected with no statistical differences (p>0.29). There was a significant impact of oral condition on quality of life after bleaching (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use or not of the gingival barrier for in-office bleaching with 6% HP was equivalent for GI, as well as for bleaching efficacy, with improvement in the impact of oral condition on quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":15133,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Oral Science","volume":"32 ","pages":"e20230416"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11037928/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Oral Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2023-0416","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: At low concentrations used for in-office bleaching gels, such as 6% HP, gingival barrier continues to be performed. If we take into account that, in the at-home bleaching technique, no barrier is indicated, it seems that the use of a gingival barrier fails to make much sense when bleaching gel in low concentration is used for in-office bleaching.
Objective: This double-blind, split-mouth, randomized clinical trial evaluated the gingival irritation (GI) of in-office bleaching using 6% hydrogen peroxide (HP) with and without a gingival barrier in adolescents, as well as color change and the impact of oral condition on quality of life.
Methodology: Overall, 60 participants were randomized into which side would or would not receive the gingival barrier. In-office bleaching was performed for 50 minutes with 6% HP in three sessions. The absolute risk and intensity of GI were assessed with a visual analogue scale. Color change was assessed using a digital spectrophotometer and color guides. The impact of oral condition on quality of life was assessed using the Brazilian version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (α=0.05).
Results: The proportion of patients who presented GI for the "with barrier" group was 31.6% and for the "without barrier" group, 30% (p=1.0). There is an equivalence for the evaluated groups regarding GI intensity (p<0.01). Color change was detected with no statistical differences (p>0.29). There was a significant impact of oral condition on quality of life after bleaching (p<0.001).
Conclusions: The use or not of the gingival barrier for in-office bleaching with 6% HP was equivalent for GI, as well as for bleaching efficacy, with improvement in the impact of oral condition on quality of life.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Applied Oral Science is committed in publishing the scientific and technologic advances achieved by the dental community, according to the quality indicators and peer reviewed material, with the objective of assuring its acceptability at the local, regional, national and international levels. The primary goal of The Journal of Applied Oral Science is to publish the outcomes of original investigations as well as invited case reports and invited reviews in the field of Dentistry and related areas.