Objective:The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the efficiency of a dentin desensitizer (1) and a one-bottle bonding agent (2) in reducing cervical hypersensitivity. Methods: The sample was consisted of forty patients with exposed root or coronal cervical dentin presented history of hypersensitivity. Three teeth per patient were treated with Gluma Desensitizer (1) (GD) (Heraus Kulzer), One Step (2) (OS) (Bisco) and placebo (distilled water) each one, respectively. One Step was used without a prior dentin etching. The hypersensitivity level was determined before, immediately after and at 8-week postoperation by thermal and tactile sensitivity tests. The verbal rating scale (VRS) was used scored as follows: 0: no discomfort, 1: discomfort but no severe pain, 2: severe pain during stimulation and 3: severe pain after simulation. The results were subjected to statistical analysis by Friedman Kruskal-Wallis and x2 tests (a=0.05). Results: The summary of mean (±SD) values of the scores were as follows (a) Before: Thermal /Tactile GD 1.74(0.16)/1.13(0.10), OS 1.55(0.17)/0.98(0.11), placebo 1.27(0.14)/0.55(0.06), (b) Immediately after: Thermal /Tactile GD 0.63(0.05)/0.48(0.05), OS 0.55(0.06)/0.40(0.03), placebo 1.16(0.15)/0.52(0.06), (c) 8-week: Thermal /Tactile GD 0.55(0.04)/0.15(0.02), OS 0.46(0.06)/0.23(0.03), placebo 1.17(0.14)/0.34(0.04). The statistical analysis of the results revealed that: a) both agents reduced the hypersensitivity in thermal and tactile stimulus immediately after treatment and up to 8 weeks, b) further reduction was determined in tactile stimulus at 8-week compared to the immediately after evaluation, c) no difference between the agents was established in reducing hypersensitivity at both evaluation times and tests, d) lower sensitivity in tactile than in thermal stimulus was assigned at all examinations. Conclusion: Both agents tested significantly reduced the cervical hypersensitivity up to 8 weeks follow-up.