IADR Abstract Archives

Clinical Comparison of High-adhesion Whitening Strips and Professional Laser-assisted Whitening

Objective: A randomized, examiner-blinded clinical trial was conducted to compare efficacy and safety of 9.5% hydrogen peroxide high-adhesion whitening strips and in-office laser-assisted whitening procedure (LaserSmile™, Biolase, USA). Methods: A total of 59 healthy adult volunteers with no history of prior bleaching and no tooth sensitivity were randomized to one of the two treatments: 9.5% hydrogen peroxide high-adhesion whitening strips used 30 min, 1/day for 20 days (take-home strips) or in-office laser-assisted whitening procedure conducted in a single visit according to manufacturer's recommendations (in-office laser+gel). Efficacy was measured objectively as L*a*b* color change using digital images of the maxillary anterior teeth at Baseline and Day 21. Results: The average age of study participants was 37 ranging from 19 to 61, and 66% were females. Treatment groups were balanced at Baseline on tooth color and demographics (p ≥ 0.4). At Day 21, both groups demonstrated significant mean yellowness reduction (Δb*) and brightness improvement (ΔL*) relative to Baseline. Additionally, the take-home strip group showed significantly (p < 0.02) greater tooth color improvement relative to the in-office laser+gel group at Day 21 with the adjusted mean (SE) Δb* of –2.18 (0.12) and -1.25 (0.15) for the take-home strips and in-office laser+gel groups, respectively, and the adjusted mean (SE) ΔL* of 1.98 (0.13) and 1.41 (0.18) for the take-home strips and in-office laser+gel groups, respectively. Both products were well-tolerated, no subject discontinued treatment due to an AE. Conclusion: Use of 9.5% hydrogen peroxide take-home whitening strips resulted in superior tooth whitening compared to an in-office laser-assisted whitening procedure.
AADR/CADR Annual Meeting
2010 AADR/CADR Annual Meeting (Washington, D.C.)
Washington, D.C.
2010
448
Dental Materials 4: Clinical Trials
  • Simon, James  ( University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA )
  • King, K. A.  ( University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA )
  • Powell, L.  ( University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA )
  • Wilson, N.  ( University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA )
  • Conde, Erinn  ( The Procter & Gamble Company, Mason, OH, USA )
  • Anastasia, Mary Kay  ( The Procter & Gamble Company, Mason, OH, USA )
  • Carson, John  ( The Procter & Gamble Company, Mason, OH, USA )
  • Farrell, Svetlana  ( The Procter & Gamble Company, Mason, OH, USA )
  • Poster Session
    Clinical Studies
    03/04/2010