J Esthet Restor Dent. 2024 Sep;36(9):1301-1310. doi: 10.1111/jerd.13209. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the color change, the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS), and gingival irritation (GI) of at-home bleaching applied on the buccal surface only or the buccal and lingual surfaces.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients with canines A2 or darker were selected and their superior arches were randomized in two groups: at-home bleaching on the buccal-only or on the buccal and lingual surfaces, with 7.5% hydrogen peroxide, for 1 h daily/2 weeks. The color change was evaluated at baseline, 7, 14 days, and 1 month after bleaching using shade guides scales (ΔSGU) and a spectrophotometer (ΔEAB, ΔE00, and ΔWID). Risk and intensity of TS and GI were recorded daily using visual analogic scale (0-10). Patient satisfaction was evaluated with the orofacial esthetics. Paired t-test, McNemar’s, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used for data analysis (α = 5%).
RESULTS: Neither the color change nor the risk/intensity of TS was statistically different between groups (p > 0.05). Patient satisfaction increased after bleaching for both groups (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The addition of one contact surface does not result in an increased whitening degree compared to bleaching applied solely on the buccal surface.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Understanding the influence of surfaces interacting with the bleaching agent is crucial for comprehending the bleaching mechanism and avoiding unnecessary material expenses. Notably, employing the buccal-only technique is sufficient to achieve the desired efficacy.
PMID:39126226 | DOI:10.1111/jerd.13209