
To evaluate the efficacy of two commercial desensitizing agents in subjects with moderate to severe dentin hypersensitivity for a period of 6 months and to compare the results with topical application of water as negative control.BisBlock (BIS; oxalate) and Gluma Desensitizer PowerGel (GLU; glutaraldehyde/HEMA) were tested. 50 subjects, average age 32.4 years, with at least one cervical hypersensitive incisor, canine or premolar tooth area and pre-operative pain score > or = 6 on VAS from 0 to 10 in each of three quadrants were included. Prior to application of the desensitizing agents or placebo (PLA; water) the sensitive areas were cleaned with prophy paste. Desensitizers were applied according to manufacturers' instructions, the placebo was left for 60 seconds dwell, rinsed off and dried. Pain scores were determined using both evaporative and tactile stimuli immediately after treatment, after 1 day, 1 week, 1, 3 and 6 months. Statistical analyses of the findings were performed using ANOVA and pot-hoc tests with a significance set at P < or = 0.05.All subjects completed the trial. Both the two desensitizing agents and placebo showed significant reduction in sensitivity at baseline and throughout the 6-month evaluation. The effects of the three treatments were significantly different. Pain reduction with GLU was consistently highest, followed by PLA that was significantly greater than BIS. VAS scores for the evaporative stimulus were moderately, but significantly lower than for tactile stimulation.
Adult, Male, Placebos, Administration, Topical, Humans, Female, Single-Blind Method, Dentin Sensitivity
Adult, Male, Placebos, Administration, Topical, Humans, Female, Single-Blind Method, Dentin Sensitivity
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 10 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
