Trial reportJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2026
Efficacy and Tooth Sensitivity of Low- Versus High-Concentration Hydrogen Peroxide for In-Office Bleaching: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2026. 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.
- Adhesive-based protective strategies for enamel cracks during in-office bleaching and their effect on hydrogen peroxide penetration.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis randomized, parallel, double-blind clinical trial aimed to evaluate the equivalence in bleaching efficacy (BE), as well as the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS), in participants undergoing in-office dental bleaching with low (6%) versus high-concentration (35%) hydrogen peroxide. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 140 participants were randomly assigned to one of the two groups according to the bleaching gel concentration used: 6% hydrogen peroxide (Automixx 6%, FGM) or 35% hydrogen peroxide (Automixx Plus 35%, FGM), the bleaching procedure was performed for 50 min in three sessions, with 1-week interval. The bleaching procedure was performed for 50 min in three sessions, with a 1-week interval. BE was evaluated using a Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer (ΔE
resultsNonequivalent bleaching outcomes were observed between the groups across all instruments and time points (p > 0.05). The 35% hydrogen peroxide group showed significantly greater efficacy than the 6% group (MD in ΔE
conclusionsIn-office dental bleaching with 6% and 35% hydrogen peroxide resulted in significant tooth whitening; however, the outcomes were not equivalent across all evaluation time points, with the 35% concentration demonstrating superior efficacy throughout the study. In contrast, TS was significantly higher in the 35% group compared with the 6% group. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: While 35% hydrogen peroxide delivers more effective tooth whitening in-office, it is also associated with a higher risk and intensity of TS. Lower concentrations like 6% offer a safer alternative with reduced sensitivity but less whitening efficacy.
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.