2002•PubMedRequires access

Comparative intraoral tolerance of sodium hexametaphosphate and pyrophosphate antitartar dentifrices.

Robert W Gerlach

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

A randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted to assess the relative acute oral tolerance of a novel, dual-phase, tartar control dentifrice containing 7.0% sodium hexametaphosphate (5% hexametaphosphate anion). In this 4-day study, 159 healthy adult volunteers were randomly assigned to the experimental sodium hexametaphosphate dentifrice or a marketed, single-phase, antitartar dentifrice control containing 5.0% ionic pyrophosphate. A detailed oral soft tissue examination and interview were conducted each day by blinded evaluators to elicit clinical signs and symptoms associated with ad libitum use of the assigned dentifrice. A total of 24 subjects (15% of the study population) had new symptoms/signs after baseline. By treatment, 9% of subjects in the sodium hexametaphosphate group had new findings, compared to 21% of subjects in the pyrophosphate group, and these groups differed statistically (p < 0.03, two-sided) with respect to occurrence. In addition, onset, severity, duration and clinical presentation were generally milder in the sodium hexametaphosphate group compared to the pyrophosphate control. Only one subject (in the pyrophosphate group) discontinued treatment early due to oral intolerance. In this study, the 7.0% sodium hexametaphosphate dentifrice was well-tolerated, with significantly fewer symptoms and superior overall tolerance compared to the marketed antitartar dentifrice control.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted to assess the relative acute oral tolerance of a novel, dual-phase, tartar control dentifrice containing 7.0% sodium hexametaphosphate (5% hexametaphosphate anion). In this 4-day study, 159 healthy adult volunteers were randomly assigned to the experimental sodium hexametaphosphate dentifrice or a marketed, single-phase, antitartar dentifrice control containing 5.0% ionic pyrophosphate. A detailed oral soft tissue examination and interview were conducted each day by blinded evaluators to elicit clinical signs and symptoms associated with ad libitum use of the assigned dentifrice. A total of 24 subjects (15% of the study population) had new symptoms/signs after baseline. By treatment, 9% of subjects in the sodium hexametaphosphate group had new findings, compared to 21% of subjects in the pyrophosphate group, and these groups differed statistically (p < 0.03, two-sided) with respect to occurrence. In addition, onset, severity, duration and clinical presentation were generally milder in the sodium hexametaphosphate group compared to the pyrophosphate control. Only one subject (in the pyrophosphate group) discontinued treatment early due to oral intolerance. In this study, the 7.0% sodium hexametaphosphate dentifrice was well-tolerated, with significantly fewer symptoms and superior overall tolerance compared to the marketed antitartar dentifrice control.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted to assess the relative acute oral tolerance of a novel, dual-phase, tartar control dentifrice containing 7.0% sodium hexametaphosphate (5% hexametaphosphate anion). In this 4-day study, 159 healthy adult volunteers were randomly assigned to the experimental sodium hexametaphosphate dentifrice or a marketed, single-phase, antitartar dentifrice control containing 5.0% ionic pyrophosphate. A detailed oral soft tissue examination and interview were conducted each day by blinded evaluators to elicit clinical signs and symptoms associated with ad libitum use of the assigned dentifrice. A total of 24 subjects (15% of the study population) had new symptoms/signs after baseline. By treatment, 9% of subjects in the sodium hexametaphosphate group had new findings, compared to 21% of subjects in the pyrophosphate group, and these groups differed statistically (p < 0.03, two-sided) with respect to occurrence. In addition, onset, severity, duration and clinical presentation were generally milder in the sodium hexametaphosphate group compared to the pyrophosphate control. Only one subject (in the pyrophosphate group) discontinued treatment early due to oral intolerance. In this study, the 7.0% sodium hexametaphosphate dentifrice was well-tolerated, with significantly fewer symptoms and superior overall tolerance compared to the marketed antitartar dentifrice control.

Key concepts: Sodium hexametaphosphate, Dentifrice, Pyrophosphate, Medicine, Dentistry, Randomized controlled trial, Clinical study, Sodium

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative intraoral tolerance of sodium hexametaphosphate and pyrophosphate antitartar dentifrices. — Research Paper | ScholarLens