A double blind controlled trial comparing three treatment modalities for dentin hypersensitivity

Aim: This randomized, double blind, split mouth study was aimed to compare three dentin desensitizing treatment modalities. Methods: Two hundred sixty teeth of 25 patients; each having at least 2 hypersensitive teeth in each quadrant, were included. Teeth were randomized to 4 groups: Group A treated with 2% NaF solution, Group B received GLUMA®; an aqueous solution of Hydroxy-Ethyl-Methacrylate and Glutarldehyde, (HEMA-G), Group C received iontophoresis with distilled water (placebo) and Group D was treated with NaF-iontophoresis. Pain response was evaluated on a visual analogue scale (VAS), by using tactile, air blast and cold-water stimuli at 0-day, 15-day, 1-month and 3-months interval. Results: All treatments were effective in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity significantly, Group D and Group B were more effective than Group A and Group C at all time intervals. Group D and Group B were equally effective in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity at 15-day and 1-month interval but Group D was more effective at 3-months. Conclusion: All treatment modalities were more effective in reducing hypersensitivity than placebo. 2% NaF-iontophoresis and HEMA-G were more effective than 2% NaF local application at all time intervals. But at 3-months, 2% NaF-iontophoresis was more effective than HEMA-G, while placebo produced no significant effect in reduction of hypersensitivity (AU)

No disponible

A double blind controlled trial comparing three treatment modalities for dentin hypersensitivity.

AIM: This randomized, double blind, split mouth study was aimed to compare three dentin desensitizing treatment modalities. METHODS: Two hundred sixty teeth of 25 patients; each having at least 2 hypersensitive teeth in each quadrant, were included. Teeth were randomized to 4 groups: Group A treated with 2% NaF solution, Group B received GLUMA®; an aqueous solution of Hydroxy-Ethyl-Methacrylate and Glutarldehyde, (HEMA-G), Group C received iontophoresis with distilled water (placebo) and Group D was treated with NaF-iontophoresis. Pain response was evaluated on a visual analogue scale (VAS), by using tactile, air blast and cold-water stimuli at 0-day, 15-day, 1-month and 3-months interval. RESULTS: All treatments were effective in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity significantly, Group D and Group B were more effective than Group A and Group C at all time intervals. Group D and Group B were equally effective in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity at 15-day and 1-month interval but Group D was more effective at 3-months. CONCLUSION: All treatment modalities were more effective in reducing hypersensitivity than placebo. 2% NaF-iontophoresis and HEMA-G were more effective than 2% NaF local application at all time intervals. But at 3-months, 2% NaF-iontophoresis was more effective than HEMA-G, while placebo produced no significant effect in reduction of hypersensitivity.