Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

Dental Tribune U.S. Edition

Dental Tribune U.S. Edition | October 2012 A19INDUSTRY NEWS Ad Advances in teeth whitening By William Simon, DMD Dentistry’s primary concerns are estab- lishing and maintaining optimal patient oral health. Our responsibilities include identification and control of disease, pa- tient education, clinical and radiographic examination, health and family history evaluations, risk factors, bacterial identi- fication and a constellation of treatment modalities. How does whitening fit into our professional responsibilities? The ADA refers to in-office whitening as “pro- fessionally applied whitening” where the higher concentration of gels are used for shorter periods of time, and preferred by patients who want results immediately. Efficacy of in-office whitening Patients who prefer same day in-office whitening are being treated with light- activated whitening gels of varying con- centrations. A body of research has dem- onstrated the efficacy of a supplementary light source; some studies demonstrated enhanced whitening with light sources, but indicated the importance of shade guides to measure changes in tooth color.1 Other studies have demonstrated improvement in whitening outcomes of 35–48 percent mea- sured by spectropho- tometer and visual methods, compared with non-light acti- vated whitening gels. The safety of light- activated whitening gels is of primary importance. Philips Zoom gel has a pH of 8.0, which does not demineralize teeth. It provides faster diffusion through enamel and dentin, hastening the whitening reac- tion. Deleterious effects on enamel and dentin reported in some studies may have been due to the acidic pH level of the in-office gels in the study.2 There have also been concerns regarding the safety of light-activated in-office whitening treat- ments on dental materials. Studies have shown the use of high concentrations of hydrogen peroxide do not affect the sur- face finish or hardness of restorations.3,4 Early whitening preparations created high incidences of sensitivity — in some cases severe enough to necessitate cessa- tion of treatment. Considerable improve- ment has occurred since the earliest prep- arations were available. A 2012 study in Compend i- um of CE in Dentistry5 evaluated the effec- tiveness of 15 percent and 25 percent light-activated gels. The authors concluded that both concentrations pro- duced significant tooth whitening imme- diately and seven days post-treatment, with no reports of gingival irritation or tooth sensitivity. Other studies have dem- onstrated a higher incidence of sensi- tivity with the use of light-activated whitening gels.6 Some in-office whiten- ing systems have made modifications WILLIAM SIMon, DMD, is a general dentist with two prac- tices in Chicago. He received his doctor of dental medicine degree from Southern Illinois University in 1983 and has lec- tured and consult- ed on various topics that re- late to the pri- vate practice of dentistry. Fig. 1: Philips Zoom WhiteSpeed Photos/ Provided by Philips Fig. 2: Philips Zoom WhiteSpeed also is available as a take-home treatment, which can help you stay connected with patients.” See WHITENING, page A20 Philips Zoom WhiteSpeed has variable intensity settings to maximize sensitivity management ADA BOOTH NO. 726