Clinical Evaluation of Different Minimal Invasive Treatment Modalities of Mild to Moderate Dental Fluorosis Using A Visual Analog Scale
1 other identifier
interventional
16
1 country
1
Brief Summary
This study was conducted for clinical evaluation of the quality of different minimal-invasive treatment modalities and combination treatments in esthetics improvement of mild to moderate fluorosed teeth using two different evaluation methods. One hundred and sixty fluorosed teeth were included in this study. Prior to the interventions, pre-operative photographs were taken as baseline records. After that teeth were randomly allocated in eight treatment protocols with twenty teeth (n=20) included in each protocol. Protocol one (P1) Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%. Protocol two (P2) Opalustre™. Protocol three (P3) MI-Paste Plus®. In protocol four (P4) teeth were treated with Opalustre™ followed by Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%. In protocol five (P5) Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40% was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®, while in protocol six (P6) Opalustre™ was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®. Whereas protocol seven (P7) teeth were treated with Opalustre™ followed by Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40% and lastly MI-Paste Plus®. Protocol eight (P8) control. All teeth were evaluated immediately after treatment (T1), after 14 days (T2), after 3 months (T3) and after 6 months (T4). They were rated for "improvement in appearance" and "change in white/brown opaque areas" using VAS through two blinded evaluators by comparing photographs of each follow-up time point with baseline. "Patient satisfaction", "tooth sensitivity" and "requirements for further treatments" were recorded by the participant.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at below P25 for not_applicable
Started Sep 2019
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
September 8, 2019
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 6, 2020
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 24, 2020
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
September 11, 2021
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
September 21, 2021
CompletedSeptember 21, 2021
September 1, 2021
8 months
September 11, 2021
September 11, 2021
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Patient Satisfaction
Participants were asked to score for "patient satisfaction" using VAS ranging from 1 to 7
Six Months
Study Arms (8)
In-office bleaching
ACTIVE COMPARATOR40% hydrogen peroxide in-office bleaching (Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%, Ultradent Products, Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA)
microabrasion
ACTIVE COMPARATOR6.6% hydrochloric acid and silicon carbide microparticles microabrasion paste (Opalustre™, Ultradent Products, Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA).
Remineralization
ACTIVE COMPARATORcasein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium fluoride phosphate (CPP-ACFP) remineralizing tooth crème (MI-Paste Plus®, GC America Inc., USA).
Microabrasion + In-office bleaching
ACTIVE COMPARATORteeth were treated with enamel microabrasion followed by in-office bleaching.
In-office bleaching + Remineralization
ACTIVE COMPARATORn-office bleaching was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®
Microabrasion + Remineralization
ACTIVE COMPARATORmicroabrasion was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®
Microabrasion + In-office bleaching + Remineralization
ACTIVE COMPARATORteeth were treated with microabrasion followed by in-office bleaching and lastly MI-Paste Plus®
Control
NO INTERVENTIONno treatment (control).
Interventions
40% hydrogen peroxide in-office bleaching
6.6% hydrochloric acid and silicon carbide microparticles microabrasion paste
casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium fluoride phosphate (CPP-ACFP) remineralizing tooth crème
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Each participant had at least 8 teeth with mild to moderate dental fluorosis score 1-4 according to Thylstrup and Fejerskov index.
- Participants of age range 20-35 years old
- Good oral and general health
- Had no caries or restorations on the teeth to be treated
- Ability to return for periodic recalls
You may not qualify if:
- Hypersensitive teeth
- Any fixed orthodontic appliance
- Current or previous use of bleaching agents
- A history of allergies to tooth whitening product
- Smoking habits
- Pregnant or lactating women
- Non-vital or teeth with symptoms of pulpitis
- Loss or fracture of maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Faculty of dentistry, Suez canal university
Ismailia, Egypt
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, INVESTIGATOR
- Masking Details
- Masking was ensured as the baseline and follow-ups photographs were stored on a computer with a unique ID and the investigators were not disclosed about the participants' treatment protocol. Blinding of the participants was guaranteed as they didn't know each other, or the treatments received in other protocols
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Mostafa Nasser Abdelmoniem Youssef
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
September 11, 2021
First Posted
September 21, 2021
Study Start
September 8, 2019
Primary Completion
May 6, 2020
Study Completion
December 24, 2020
Last Updated
September 21, 2021
Record last verified: 2021-09
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share