Trial reportClinical oral investigations2022
Gingival irritation in patients submitted to at-home bleaching with different cutouts of the bleaching tray: a randomized, single-blind clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05835453 (PATIENT SATISFACTION WITH AT-HOME DENTAL BLEACHING USING VIVERA OR ESSIX RETAINERS), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
Patient satisfaction with at-home dental bleaching using vivera or essix retainers: a randomized clinical trial
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of the in-office bleaching gels pH on tooth sensitivity in combined bleaching techniques: a randomized clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- Effect of gingival barrier brands on operator perception, cervical adaptation, and patient comfort during in-office tooth bleaching: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- In-office dental bleaching in adolescents using 6% hydrogen peroxide with and without gingival barrier: a randomized double-blind clinical trial.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2024Trial
- Effects of phthalimidoperoxycaproic acid (PAP+) associated or not with LED irradiation as a bleaching agent: an in vitro study.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Patient satisfaction with at-home dental bleaching using Vivera or Essix retainers: a randomised clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Clinical myths in dental bleaching: an evidence-based structured narrative review.Brazilian oral research · 2026Review
- Assessment of Color Change, Esthetic Perception, Treatment Satisfaction, and Side Effects Following the Use of Over-the-Counter Whitening Products.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 2023Article
- Evaluation of at-home bleaching protocol with application on different surfaces: bleaching efficacy and hydrogen peroxide permeability.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis split-mouth randomized, single-blind clinical trial evaluated the gingival irritation (GI) of at-home bleaching with individual trays of different cutouts, as well as the tooth sensitivity (TS) and color change. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred and twenty patients were randomized as to which side would receive the type of bleaching tray cutout: scalloped (in the gingival margin) and nonscalloped (extended from the gingival margin). The at-home bleaching was performed for 30 min with 10% hydrogen peroxide (HP) for 2 weeks. The absolute risk and intensity of GI and TS were assessed with a visual analog scale. Color change was assessed using a digital spectrophotometer and a color guide (α = 0.05).
resultsThe proportion of patients who experienced GI was 57.5% (odds ratio 95% CI = 1.1 [0.7 to 1.8]), with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.66). The proportion of patients who experienced TS was 64.1% (odds ratio 95% CI = 1.0 [0.6 to 1.6]), with no significant difference between groups (p = 1.0). There is equivalence of scalloped and noscalloped groups for GI intensity (p < 0.01). Significant whitening was detected for both groups. Although some differences were observed between groups (CIEL
conclusionsThe different cutouts of trays proved to be equivalent when regarding gengival irritation and tooth sensitivity when 10% HP for at-home bleaching was used. Significant color change was observed in both groups. However, significant differences detected between groups are not considered clinically noticeable.
trial registrationBrazilian Clinical Trials Registry (RBR-2s34685). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Scalloped or not, the individual trays for at-home bleaching could be considered a clinician's decision.
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.