Clinical evaluation of a 35% hydrogen peroxide in-office whitening system.
Aikaterini Papathanasiou, Samer Kastali, Ronald D. Perry, Gérard Kugel
Abstract
Aikaterini Papathanasiou, Samer Kastali, Ronald D. Perry, Gérard Kugel
Abstract
This study evaluated the effectiveness of light-curing (heat conversion) vs no light-curing (no heat conversion) of a 35% hydrogen peroxide in-office tooth whitening system. Twenty patients with sound medical history (without tooth sensitivity) participated in this randomized, parallel clinical evaluation. Only six maxillary anterior teeth with discoloration and a tooth shade of A3 or darker were selected. Patients received a complete prophylaxis and were evaluated for initial (baseline) shade by three independent evaluators, precalibrated at 85% rater reliability in determining shades before the experiment began. Participants received a 20-minute chairside whitening treatment with a 35% hydrogen peroxide agent using a reflective resin barrier for gingival isolation. During the whitening treatment, the 35% hydrogen peroxide agent was light-activated with a halogen curing light on teeth Nos. 6 through 8 (Group I), but was not light-activated on teeth Nos. 9 through 11 (Group II). All patients returned 24 hours after the whitening application for shade evaluation. Although there were isolated instances (7 out of 20 patients) of greater degrees of lightening in the light-curing group, there was no statistically significant difference using the Mann-Whitney U test (P > .05). This study indicates that light-curing is optional with this 35% tooth whitening system.
OpenAlex reports 99 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This study evaluated the effectiveness of light-curing (heat conversion) vs no light-curing (no heat conversion) of a 35% hydrogen peroxide in-office tooth whitening system. Twenty patients with sound medical history (without tooth sensitivity) participated in this randomized, parallel clinical evaluation. Only six maxillary anterior teeth with discoloration and a tooth shade of A3 or darker were selected. Patients received a complete prophylaxis and were evaluated for initial (baseline) shade by three independent evaluators, precalibrated at 85% rater reliability in determining shades before the experiment began. Participants received a 20-minute chairside whitening treatment with a 35% hydrogen peroxide agent using a reflective resin barrier for gingival isolation. During the whitening treatment, the 35% hydrogen peroxide agent was light-activated with a halogen curing light on teeth Nos. 6 through 8 (Group I), but was not light-activated on teeth Nos. 9 through 11 (Group II). All patients returned 24 hours after the whitening application for shade evaluation. Although there were isolated instances (7 out of 20 patients) of greater degrees of lightening in the light-curing group, there was no statistically significant difference using the Mann-Whitney U test (P > .05). This study indicates that light-curing is optional with this 35% tooth whitening system.
Key concepts: Hydrogen peroxide, Tooth whitening, Dentistry, Curing (chemistry), Medicine, Halogen lamp, Anterior teeth, Materials science