Trial reportClinical oral investigations2018
Randomised clinical trial to evaluate changes in dentine tubule occlusion following 4 weeks use of an occluding toothpaste.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The rise of dentine hypersensitivity and tooth wear in an ageing population.British dental journal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this study is to determine whether a silicone impression material could precisely replicate dentine tubule changes following 4 weeks toothbrushing with occluding or non-occluding toothpaste and whether changes reflected hypersensitivity clinical assessment. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a single site, examiner blind, parallel, two treatment arm, randomised clinical trial. Participants were healthy, ≥18, with ≥1 sensitive tooth with exposed dentine, Schiff sensitivity score ≥2, and patent tubules with dentine occlusion score 4-5 as determined by scanning electron microscopy of replica impressions. Nine participants received Sensodyne® Rapid Relief (occluding toothpaste) and 10 Crest® Decay Prevention (non-occluding toothpaste), and were re-evaluated for sensitivity and occlusion score after two timed minutes and 4 weeks twice-daily home brushing.
resultsOcclusion scores did not correlate significantly with pain scores, but correlations were positive and impressions showed characteristic dentine tubule patency and occlusion. After 4 weeks, thermal VAS was significantly lower than baseline for the non-occluding toothpaste; all other pain scores were significantly lower for both treatments. Dentine occlusion scores also decreased after 4 weeks of either treatment, but did not achieve significance (p = 0.0625).
conclusionsBoth toothpastes reduced clinical sensitivity and increased tubule occlusion. It is hypothesised that during impression, taking some material may have sheared off and occluded tubules resulting in false positives. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study has demonstrated that a silicone impression material can accurately replicate the dentine surface to demonstrate dentine tubular occlusion and patency; however, although the association between occlusion and pain score was positive, this technique needs to be refined before use in future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.