A Phase 3 interventional study of Fluoride Varnish and Glass Ionomer Sealant in Dentin Hypersensitivity and Dentin Sensitivity, sponsored by University of Sao Paulo. Completed at 1 site in Brazil. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 70 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-10-20.
Sponsored by University of Sao Paulo · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment
Dentin hypersensitivity (DH) can be defined as acute, short-duration pain from open dentin tubules in exposed dentin. The symptom of DH is subjective and varies from patient to patient and may present as mild discomfort or as a high-intensity pain, which can affect the individual's quality of life, interfering with their eating and hygiene habits. One approach to treatment would be the use of agents that chemically desensitize sensory nerves, blocking the transmission of nerve stimuli to the central nervous system.
The effectiveness of desensitizing treatments is influenced by several factors present in the oral cavity, which can contribute to a greater effect of these agents but can also be responsible for removing them from the dental surface. To date, studies have been carried out in the short term, not exceeding an average period of 12 weeks, so there is no consensus on the technique or agent that will guarantee the most effective and lasting effect against DH, not even the ideal period for reapplication. Thus, more studies are needed to assess the clinical behavior of desensitizing products on the market, especially the most recent releases. Therefore, the aim of this study was to clinically compare the effectiveness of different office treatments for DH, being ClinproTM White Varnish, ClinproTM XT Varnish, and a control group (placebo) through pain assessment with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), after stimulation with air from the triple syringe.
This study compares the effectiveness of two in-office treatment for dentin hypersensitivity: G1:ClinproTM White Varnish, G2:ClinproTM XT Varnish, and a G3:placebo (where the application of a product was only simulated). Recruitment of the 121 volunteers were based on their self-reported complaint of dentin hypersensitivity, which confirmed with the use of an air blast from a triple syringe. Then, he/she showed in the VAS scale (which varies from 0=no pain to 10=the worst pain possible) the value that best describes the pain sensation. The subjects that present at least one tooth with a value of 4 and above in the VAS scale (if more than one hypersensitive tooth was present, the mean VAS values obtained were used, for each patient) was randomly allocated into the experimental groups. Two weeks before the study started, the volunteers went through a wash out period, where they used only the oral hygiene products donated by the researchers, which were used up to the end of the study. The in-office treatments were performed after prophylaxis, according to the manufacturer´s instructions, by one trained researcher, which was blind to the treatments. DH evaluation was performed 15 min after the application of the treatments, by a different researcher, which also blind to the treatment, and which used the same methodology described early for the detection of initial pain. The volunteers were recalled for the DH evaluation after one and four weeks of the treatments. DH evaluation was also performed after 12 and 24 weeks of the treatments, except in the placebo group, which received the proper DH treatment after the first four weeks of the study. Data was analyzed with the appropriate statistical methods (α=0.05).
283 studies on the registry are indexed under Dentin Sensitivity; 45 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 121 is above the median of 60 across 274 interventional studies indexed under Dentin Sensitivity.
Browse Dentin Sensitivity studies →University of Sao Paulo is the lead sponsor of 1,005 studies on the registry; 90 are open to participants now.
Of its 7 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Application of ClinproTM White Varnish containing sodium fluoride (5%) and Tricalcium phosphate (TCP). A technology that allows calcium and phosphate ions to coexist with fluoride ions separately, forming a more resistant mineral on the tooth surface (3M ESPE Clinpro White Varnish; 3M ESPE Clinpro 5000).
Drug: Fluoride Varnish
Application of ClinproTM XT Varnish, a resin-modified glass ionomer sealant. Creates a protective layer on exposed dentin, which is durable and has the ability to release fluoride, calcium and phosphate into the surroundings. (3M ESPE Clinpro XT Varnish).
Drug: Glass Ionomer Sealant
Participants who were part of the placebo group continuously used only the conventional toothpaste provided in the oral hygiene kit during the initial four weeks of the research and received a simulated treatment.
Other: Placebo Group
Following the manufacturer's recommendations, it was not necessary to moisten or dry the treated surface beforehand or afterwards. The product was dispensed and manipulated for 15 s until a homogeneous mixture was obtained, applied with a micro brush, flowing into interproximal areas, and quickly adhering to the tooth surface in the presence of saliva.
Also known as: ClinproTM White Varnish
Following the manufacturer's recommendations, prophylaxis and prior drying of the treated surface was carried out, the product was also dispensed and manipulated for 15 s until a homogeneous mixture was obtained, applied with a micro brush and light-cured for 20 s.
Also known as: ClinproTM XT Varnish, Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Sealant
4 weeks after the simulation of the treatment application, participants in the placebo group received DH treatment with the product that had the best effect in the first 4 weeks.
Change in the dentin hypersensitivity
The evaluation was performed with the use of Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The volunteers pointed out on the VAS (ranging from 0=no pain to 10=worst possible pain) the whole number, which best described his perception of pain at the moment. The primary outcome was the difference between the Visual Analog Scale values obtained in the baseline and 4 weeks after the treatment.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Dentin hypersensitivity
This secondary outcome was the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score related to dentin hypersensitivity. The volunteers pointed out on the VAS (ranging from 0=no pain to 10=worst possible pain) the whole number, which best described his perception of pain at the moment. Visual Analog Scale was applied before the treatment (baseline), 15 minutes after the procedures, one week, and 4 weeks after treatments to measure the changes in dentin hypersensitivity.
Time frame: baseline, 15 minutes after the treatments, 1 week and 4 weeks.
Change in the dentin hypersensitivity
The evaluation was performed with the use of Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The volunteers pointed out on the VAS (ranging from 0=no pain to 10=worst possible pain) the whole number, which best described his perception of pain at the moment. This secondary outcome was the difference between the Visual Analog Scale values obtained in the baseline and 3 and 6 months after the treatment (Long-term differences in the VAS values).
Time frame: 3 months and 6 months
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Sao Paulo