Mottled teeth
Conditions
Interventions
Sponsors
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Ages from 18 until 30 years old; good general health; do not present enamel erosion, dental abfraction, caries, periodontal disease or fluorosis ; do not use orthodontic appliance or removable prostheses; present all teeth - first molar to first molar (Upper and Lower); Avaiability of recurring returns; absence of gingival recession; teeth with A2 or darker color.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Chemically dependent patients, nonsmokers and alcoholic ; medical condition that may interefere in patients' security during the study: use of drug therapy to chronic disease or allergic reaction to substances that will be used; pregnancy; participate of another study in the same time; pressenting restorations in the six anterior teeth of each arch; frequent use of fluoride supplementation or desensitization substances; bruxism; periapical lesions; tooth sensitivity.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| There will be no difference in tooth color change among the groups. Color change determined by visual scales Vitapan Classical and Bleachedguide 3-D Master and spectrophotometer Easyshade;There was no difference in tooth color change among the groups verified with visual scales Vitapan Classical and Bleachedguide 3-D Master and spectrophotometer Easyshade (p value higher than 0.05) | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected Secondary Outcome 1: There will be no difference in tooth sensibility reported among the groups. Tooth sensibility determined by visual analogue scale;Expected Secondary Outcome 2:There will be no difference in gingival condition reported among the groups. Gingival condition determined by Loe index;Expected Secondary Outcome 3: There will be no difference in patient satisfaction for bleaching techniques among the groups. Patient satisfaction with a subjective evaluation about bleaching procedures with a questionnaire;Secondary outcome found 1: There was difference in tooth sensibility among the groups (p value lower than 0.05). In risk absolute determination, the groups was similiar among them (p value higher than 0.05). Considering tooth sensibility intensity, comparing the groups, there were no difference for the time and interaction factors, but there was difference for bleaching factor, in which, OGO presented higher tooth sensibility intensity than WTC (p value higher than 0.05);Secondary outcome found 2:There was difference in gingival condition verified (valor de p lower than 0.05). For absolute risk, there was difference among the groups (valor de p lower than 0.05). OGO presented higher gingival inflamation than WTC and OPF didi not presented gingival inflamation. For intensity, it was similar among the groups after the end of the treatment;Secondary outcome found 3:There was no difference in volunteers satisfaction in relation to the result of bleaching technique. More than 85% of patients were satisfied;Expected Secondary Outcome 4: There will be no difference in enamel demineralization for bleaching techniques among the groups. Enamel demineralization will be assessed by diode laser device.;Secondary outcome found 4: No signal of enamel demineralization was found among the groups after treatment. | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Instituto de Ciência e Tecnolgia