Patricia Pereira-Lores, Jenifer Martín-González, Tania Gancedo-Gancedo, Víctor Alonso de la Peña, Pablo Álvarez-Nóvoa, Iván Varela-Aneiros, Francesc Abella-Sans, Benjamín Martín-Biedma, Pablo Castelo-Baz
{"title":"在家庭漂白治疗中使用 3 毫米加长托盘是否会增加牙龈刺激?随机临床试验。","authors":"Patricia Pereira-Lores, Jenifer Martín-González, Tania Gancedo-Gancedo, Víctor Alonso de la Peña, Pablo Álvarez-Nóvoa, Iván Varela-Aneiros, Francesc Abella-Sans, Benjamín Martín-Biedma, Pablo Castelo-Baz","doi":"10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.09.029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Statement of problem: </strong>Gingival irritation is a common side effect of at-home bleaching, but how the design of the bleaching tray affects its occurrence is unclear.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to determine whether a direct relationship is present between the design of bleaching trays and the risk of gingival irritation during at-home bleaching treatments.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This clinical trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. (NCT06371664). Seventy-two participants were randomly assigned to 2 experimental groups: extended bleaching tray (3 mm) and nonextended bleaching tray (1 mm). Over a period of 3 weeks, participants underwent a nightguard dental bleaching treatment (6 to 8 hours) using 16% carbamide peroxide gel. Gingival irritation was evaluated subjectively by participants daily and objectively by clinicians at each visit. Tooth sensitivity was recorded daily using a 5-point numerical scale. Tooth color measurements were also made with a dental spectrophotometer. The risk of gingival irritation and the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity were analyzed with the Pearson chi squared test and Fisher exact test. The color analysis was conducted with the Student t test (α=.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Subjectively, the risk of gingival irritation was 66.7% in the extended group and 47.2% in the nonextended group, showing no statistically significant difference (P>.05). However, objectively, the risk of gingival irritation was significantly higher in the extended group (88.9%) compared with the nonextended group (63.9%) (P=.01(95% CI 1.06 to 1.83). Tooth sensitivity intensity was significantly higher in the extended tray group (P<.001), although the design did not significantly influence the risk of tooth sensitivity (P>.05). No significant differences were found between groups regarding color change (P>.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of an extended bleaching tray design increases the risk of gingival irritation and the intensity of tooth sensitivity. Therefore, the nonextended tray is recommended to minimize adverse reactions.</p>","PeriodicalId":16866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the use of a 3-mm extended tray during an at-home bleaching treatment increase gingival irritation? A randomized clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Patricia Pereira-Lores, Jenifer Martín-González, Tania Gancedo-Gancedo, Víctor Alonso de la Peña, Pablo Álvarez-Nóvoa, Iván Varela-Aneiros, Francesc Abella-Sans, Benjamín Martín-Biedma, Pablo Castelo-Baz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.09.029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Statement of problem: </strong>Gingival irritation is a common side effect of at-home bleaching, but how the design of the bleaching tray affects its occurrence is unclear.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to determine whether a direct relationship is present between the design of bleaching trays and the risk of gingival irritation during at-home bleaching treatments.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This clinical trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. (NCT06371664). Seventy-two participants were randomly assigned to 2 experimental groups: extended bleaching tray (3 mm) and nonextended bleaching tray (1 mm). Over a period of 3 weeks, participants underwent a nightguard dental bleaching treatment (6 to 8 hours) using 16% carbamide peroxide gel. Gingival irritation was evaluated subjectively by participants daily and objectively by clinicians at each visit. Tooth sensitivity was recorded daily using a 5-point numerical scale. Tooth color measurements were also made with a dental spectrophotometer. The risk of gingival irritation and the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity were analyzed with the Pearson chi squared test and Fisher exact test. The color analysis was conducted with the Student t test (α=.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Subjectively, the risk of gingival irritation was 66.7% in the extended group and 47.2% in the nonextended group, showing no statistically significant difference (P>.05). However, objectively, the risk of gingival irritation was significantly higher in the extended group (88.9%) compared with the nonextended group (63.9%) (P=.01(95% CI 1.06 to 1.83). Tooth sensitivity intensity was significantly higher in the extended tray group (P<.001), although the design did not significantly influence the risk of tooth sensitivity (P>.05). No significant differences were found between groups regarding color change (P>.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of an extended bleaching tray design increases the risk of gingival irritation and the intensity of tooth sensitivity. Therefore, the nonextended tray is recommended to minimize adverse reactions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.09.029\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.09.029","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
问题陈述:牙龈刺激是居家漂白的常见副作用,但漂白盘的设计如何影响牙龈刺激的发生尚不清楚。目的:本随机临床试验旨在确定漂白盘的设计与居家漂白治疗过程中牙龈刺激的风险之间是否存在直接关系:该临床试验已在 ClinicalTrials.gov.(NCT06371664)上注册。72名参与者被随机分配到两个实验组:加长漂白托盘(3毫米)和非加长漂白托盘(1毫米)。在为期 3 周的时间里,参与者使用 16% 过氧化卡巴酰胺凝胶进行了一次夜用牙齿漂白治疗(6 至 8 小时)。参与者每天对牙龈刺激性进行主观评估,临床医生则在每次就诊时对牙龈刺激性进行客观评估。每天使用 5 点数字量表记录牙齿敏感度。此外,还使用牙科分光光度计测量牙齿颜色。牙龈刺激的风险和牙齿敏感的风险和强度采用皮尔逊卡方检验和费雪精确检验进行分析。颜色分析采用学生 t 检验(α=.05):主观上,扩展组牙龈刺激风险为 66.7%,非扩展组为 47.2%,差异无统计学意义(P>.05)。但从客观上看,延长组的牙龈刺激风险(88.9%)明显高于非延长组(63.9%)(P=.01(95% CI 1.06 至 1.83))。加长托盘组的牙齿敏感度明显更高(P.05)。各组在颜色变化方面没有明显差异(P>.05):使用加长漂白托盘会增加牙龈刺激的风险和牙齿敏感的强度。因此,建议使用非加长型漂白盘,以尽量减少不良反应。
Does the use of a 3-mm extended tray during an at-home bleaching treatment increase gingival irritation? A randomized clinical trial.
Statement of problem: Gingival irritation is a common side effect of at-home bleaching, but how the design of the bleaching tray affects its occurrence is unclear.
Purpose: The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to determine whether a direct relationship is present between the design of bleaching trays and the risk of gingival irritation during at-home bleaching treatments.
Material and methods: This clinical trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. (NCT06371664). Seventy-two participants were randomly assigned to 2 experimental groups: extended bleaching tray (3 mm) and nonextended bleaching tray (1 mm). Over a period of 3 weeks, participants underwent a nightguard dental bleaching treatment (6 to 8 hours) using 16% carbamide peroxide gel. Gingival irritation was evaluated subjectively by participants daily and objectively by clinicians at each visit. Tooth sensitivity was recorded daily using a 5-point numerical scale. Tooth color measurements were also made with a dental spectrophotometer. The risk of gingival irritation and the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity were analyzed with the Pearson chi squared test and Fisher exact test. The color analysis was conducted with the Student t test (α=.05).
Results: Subjectively, the risk of gingival irritation was 66.7% in the extended group and 47.2% in the nonextended group, showing no statistically significant difference (P>.05). However, objectively, the risk of gingival irritation was significantly higher in the extended group (88.9%) compared with the nonextended group (63.9%) (P=.01(95% CI 1.06 to 1.83). Tooth sensitivity intensity was significantly higher in the extended tray group (P<.001), although the design did not significantly influence the risk of tooth sensitivity (P>.05). No significant differences were found between groups regarding color change (P>.05).
Conclusions: The use of an extended bleaching tray design increases the risk of gingival irritation and the intensity of tooth sensitivity. Therefore, the nonextended tray is recommended to minimize adverse reactions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. The Journal is the official publication for 24 leading U.S. international prosthodontic organizations. The monthly publication features timely, original peer-reviewed articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice, and features color photos that illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is included in Index Medicus and CINAHL.