Dentine Hypersensitivity
Conditions
Keywords
Dentine Hypersensitivity, Nd:YAG Laser, Diode Laser, Propolis, Lasers in Dentistry, Dentin Desensitizing Agents
Brief summary
Dentine hypersensitivity is a common clinical problem. Although Nd:YAG lasers, diode lasers, and topical desensitizing agents are widely utilized, long-term comparative evidence regarding their clinical efficacy remains limited. This prospective, randomized, parallel-arm, evaluator-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial evaluated and compared the 12-month clinical performance of an Nd:YAG laser, a diode laser, a herbal propolis-based dentin barrier agent, and a sham application.
Detailed description
This study was conducted as a prospective, randomized, parallel-arm, evaluator-blinded, sham-controlled clinical trial to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of four different treatment modalities for dentine hypersensitivity over a 6-month follow-up period. A total of 140 patients who met the eligibility criteria were enrolled and randomly allocated into four equal groups (n=35 per group) using a block randomization method with a 1:1:1:1 allocation ratio. The intervention groups were assigned as follows: Group 1 received Nd:YAG laser application. Group 2 received Diode laser application. Group 3 received a topical application of a herbal propolis-based dentin barrier agent. Group 4 received a sham (placebo) application to simulate the treatment experience without delivering any active laser or therapeutic agent benefits. Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline, immediately post-treatment, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. The primary outcome was the change in pain intensity measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) following a controlled air blast stimulus from baseline to 6 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in the Schiff Cold Air Sensitivity Scale, tactile sensitivity scores, patient satisfaction levels, the documentation of any adverse events, and the need for additional treatment during the 6-month period. To ensure objectivity, all clinical assessments and statistical analyses were performed by researchers who were fully blinded to the treatment allocations.
Interventions
DEVICENd:YAG Laser Application
Nd:YAG laser application performed for the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity.
DEVICEDiode Laser Application
Diode laser application performed for the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity.
OTHERHerbal Propolis-Based Dentin Barrier Agent
Topical application of a herbal propolis-based dentin barrier agent.
OTHERSham Application
Placebo/sham procedure to simulate treatment without delivering active laser or therapeutic agent benefits
Sponsors
Ondokuz Mayıs University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Intervention model description
A randomized, parallel-group, evaluator-blinded, sham-controlled clinical trial with four allocation arms. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to one of the four groups in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive a single type of intervention (Nd:YAG laser, Diode laser, herbal propolis-based dentin barrier agent, or sham application) and were followed up for a period of 6 months.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patients aged between 18 and 65 years. * Presence of at least two hypersensitive teeth. * Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score of 4 or higher (VAS \>= 4) following stimulus. * Schiff Cold Air Sensitivity Scale score of 2 or higher (Schiff \>= 2). * Presence of vital teeth in the target area. * Patient is willing and able to provide written informed consent prior to study initiation.
Exclusion criteria
* Pregnancy or lactation. * Presence of active periodontal disease in the target area. * Teeth with dental caries, deep restorations, or cracked tooth syndrome. * Endodontically treated teeth. * History of allergy or hypersensitivity related to the materials, products, or chemical agents used in the study.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score after Air Stimulus | Baseline and 6 months | Pain intensity evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), where scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme/worst pain). The primary outcome is defined as the change in pain intensity in response to a controlled air blast stimulus from baseline to 6 months. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Schiff Cold Air Sensitivity Scale Score | Baseline, immediately post-treatment, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months | Dentine sensitivity assessed using the Schiff Cold Air Sensitivity Scale, where scores range from 0 (patient does not respond to air stimulus) to 3 (patient responds to air stimulus, experiences pain, and requests discontinuation of stimulus). |
| Tactile Sensitivity Score | Baseline, immediately post-treatment, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months | Tactile sensitivity evaluated using a standard dental explorer probe passed across the affected dentine surface to record the presence or absence of discomfort or pain. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed