Effect on enamel microhardness of two consumer-available bleaching solutions when compared with a dentist-prescribed, home-applied bleaching solution and a control

Ralph H. Leonard, Erica C.N. Teixeira, Glenn E. Garland, André V. Ritter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: There exists limited data in the literature regarding the efficacy and safety of consumer-available, paint-on bleaching solutions. Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of two consumer-available, paint-on bleaching products on enamel microhardness against a control and a dentist-prescribed, home-applied (DPHA) bleaching product. Materials and Methods: Eighty enamel slabs were obtained from extracted human teeth and randomly divided into four treatment groups: (1) control; (2) Opalescence (Ultradent Products, Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA); (3) Crest Night Effects (Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH, USA); and (4) Colgate Simply White Night (Colgate-Palmolive Co., Piscataway, NJ, USA). Opalescence is a carbamide peroxide DPHA product, whereas Crest Night Effects and Colgate Simply White Night are consumer-available products. The specimens in groups 2 to 4 underwent 2 weeks of treatment for 8 h/d. Specimens were maintained in artificial saliva at 37°C between treatments. Subsequently, one-half of the specimens in groups 2 to 4 (n = 10) underwent an additional seven treatments for 8 h/d, while the other half were stored in artificial saliva, receiving no further treatment. Microhardness was measured as Knoop hardness numbers (KHNs) at baseline and after 1, 7, 14, and 21 treatment days. The results were analyzed for statistical significance both intra- and intergroups using analysis of variance (p = .05). Results: A statistically significant reduction in mean KHN was observed compared with baseline at 1, 7, 14, and 21 treatment days for group 4 and at 7 treatment days for group 3. When compared with the control or DPHA product, group 4 was the only treatment that resulted in significantly lower mean KHNs at 7, 14, and 21 treatment days. Conclusion: When evaluating enamel microhardness, consumer available, paint-on bleaching solutions may adversely affect enamel microhardness compared to a control and 10% carbamide peroxide DPHA bleaching solution.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)343-349
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Volume17
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2005

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Effect on enamel microhardness of two consumer-available bleaching solutions when compared with a dentist-prescribed, home-applied bleaching solution and a control'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this