Effects Of An Experimental Dentifrice On Oral Health And Tooth Stain

Objectives: Comparison of the effects of an experimental ultra-low abrasivity (Relative Dentine Abrasion (RDA) ~12) anti-sensitivity dentifrice and a moderate abrasivity marketed fluoride dentifrice on plaque, gingival health and extrinsic tooth stain after 12 weeks use, as measured by Gingival Index (GI), a modification of the Turesky Modification of Quigley Hein Plaque Index (TPI) and the Macpherson modification of the Lobene Stain Index (MLSI).
Methods: This was a single-centre, examiner-blind, randomised, controlled, parallel group study. At baseline, after oral soft tissue was evaluated, GI, and TPI were assessed on the Ramjford teeth only. The MLSI was assessed on the standard cosmetic teeth for this method (8 incisors). Qualifying subjects received a dental prophylaxis and were randomised to twice daily use of either an experimental dentifrice containing 5% w/w potassium nitrate and 5% w/w sodium tripolyphosphate (RDA~12),or a marketed fluoride dentifrice (Colgate® Cavity Protection, RDA~68). Subjects abstained from tooth brushing for 18 hours before visits. Assessments were repeated at 6 and 12 weeks. 147 subjects were screened, 136 subjects were randomised and 134 subjects completed the study.
Results: Small but statistically significant (p<0.05) between treatment differences were reported in GI at both time-points, in favour of the experimental dentifrice. Small but statistically significant (p<0.05) between treatment differences were reported in TPI at both time-points, in favour of the marketed fluoride dentifrice. Twice daily brushing with both study treatments resulted in similar low levels of extrinsic stain after 6 and 12 weeks, with no statistically significant between treatment differences.
Conclusions: Over a 12 week period the experimental ultra-low abrasivity dentifrice performed similarly to a regular fluoride dentifrice for the maintenance of gingival health, control of supra-gingival plaque and extrinsic stain. Very small, but significant differences were seen between treatments for GI and TPI. No between treatment differences were seen for MLSI.